
Class _ 
Book_ 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 




WSartaia.^jr 






. 



. 



OVYRIO^ 



THE 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH 



HISTORICALLY, DOCTRINALLY, AND PRACTICALLY 



DELINEATED, 



IN SEVERAL OCCASIONAL DISCOURSES 



BY S. S/SCHMUCKER, D. D., 

PROFESSOR OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE 
GENERAL SYNOD, GETTYSBURG, PA. 



SPRINGFIELD: 

PUBLISHED BY HARBAUGH & BUTLER. 

1851. 



^i 



■z * 



.f>« 



Entered according to act of Congress, in the year one thou- 
sand, eight hundred and fifty-one, by D. Hareafgh and J. B. 
Butler, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the 
United States, in and for the District of Ohio. 



GEO. 1). EMERSON & CO 

STEREOTYPERS, 
SPRINGFIELD, OHIO. 



PREFACE. 

In offering this work to the public, it is proper 
that some of the considerations which have actua- 
ted the publishers, should be stated. The title it- 
self is significant of the subject on which it treats. 
The true history, real character, present position, 
and distinctive features of the Lutheran Church in 
the world, are little known, often misunderstood, 
and sometimes grossly misrepresented in this 
country. 

Among the causes which may be assigned for 
this, we mention the want of a proper knowledge 
of Church History in general, and of Protestantism 
in particular; non-acquaintance with the German 
language, and, it is to be feared, denominational 
bigotry. 

The Lutheran Church was the first to throw off 
the yoke of ecclesiastical tyranny, and break the 
scepter of religious despotism; to maintain the 
great Protestant principle, that the Bible is the 
only infallible rule of faith and practice ; to assert 
the right of private judgment in the interpretation 



IV PREFACE. 

of the Scriptures; and to proclaim the doctrine of 
Justification of Faith alone, as the foundation of a 
"standing and falling church." Her institutions 
are second to none on earth; and her literature, 
embracing every subject of religious inquiry, is the 
glory of Christendom, furnishing an antidote to 
false philosophy and rationalism on the one hand, 
and to vulgar infidelity on the other. 

Her fundamental doctrines are those of the 
Reformation, found, in their essential aspects, in all 
the symbols of Protestantism. 

Her peculiarities place her in a medium position 
in Church extremes — in doctrine, worship, rites, 
and government. Her territory of operation is ex- 
tended over a large portion of the globe, embracing 
more than thirty millions of human beings, consti- 
tuting nearly one-half of Protestantism, and the 
hope of much of the world. 

Her history is intimately interwoven with that 
of the Reformation of the sixteenth century, fur- 
nishing lessons of wisdom and experience to in- 
struct and encourage, as well as of presumption 
and folly to warn and rebuke. All God's dealings 
with her should teach all her sons, that she was 
planted, watered, and preserved by Him. 

But the volume before us treats of the " Ameri- 
can Lutheran Church." This is a branch of the 
same vine, planted here more than a century ago, 
by the right hand of the Lord. Although labor- 



PEEFACE. 



ing under many disadvantages, arising from the 
union of Church and State in Europe, the oppres- 
sions of their governments, the unsettled state of 
this country, and the want of a knowledge of its 
language, she has nevertheless overcome many of 
them, and extended herself far and wide over our 
land. The number of her ministers and member- 
ship has been doubled every fifteen years, by natu- 
ral increase and immigration ; so that she is already 
in number the third Protestant denomination in the 
United States. 

Notwithstanding all this, the remark made- at 
the beginning of this Preface is true, that much 
ignorance exists, and constant misrepresentations 
take place, relative to the Lutheran Church in the 
United States. Although information has been 
spread through her periodicals and publications, in 
this country, there is none in which so full and 
satisfactory an account of the Lutheran Church 
in America can be found as in the present volume. 

The First Discourse embraces a history of the 
rise and progress of the Church in this country. 

The Second presents her characteristic features — 
the peculiarities by which she is distinguished from 
other branches of the Protestant family. 

The Third gives a biography of her founders, 
here, showing us the extent of their labors, the 
soundness of their doetrin d views, the sincerity of 
the '■■-' i Hindi f their knowledge, the 



VI PREFACE. 

wisdom of their measures, and the success of their 
labors. 

The Fourth discusses the nature of the Saviour's 
presence in the Lord's Supper, in which the corpo- 
ral presence of Christ's human nature is denied, 
and his spiritual presence, according to his divine 
nature, is maintained. 

The Fifth discusses the question pertaining to 
her doctrinal basis and ecclesiastical position, in 
this country; showing that it is neither rigid sym- 
bolism, binding the conscience to the letter of every 
doctrine and statement contained in the whole of 
the symbolical books, nor loose latitudinarianism, 
discarding all creeds but the adoption of the 
Augsburg Confession and Luther's Smaller Cate- 
chism, as teaching the fundamental doctrines of 
the word of God, "in a manner substantially 
correct." 

The Sixth points out her vocation, calling upon 
her to realize her obligations, to take warning from 
past errors, to guard against present dangers, to 
develope her various resources, to advance her spir- 
itual interests, and to extend her blessings to all 
her children. 

The Author, the Rev. Dr. S. S. Schmucker, has 
been, for twenty years, Professor of Theology in 
the Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, Pennsyl- 
vania. In the Lutheran Church he is extensively 



PREFACE. Vli 

and favorably known ; and no man in this country 
has done more than he to elevate her character, 
and to advance her welfare. As a writer, he is 
able and clear. His style is chaste and easy, and 
his arguments strong and convincing. His " Fra- 
ternal Appeal" to the American churches on Chris- 
tian union, is a master-piece, which, with his other 
theological and philosophical works, has made him 
extensively known, beyond the bounds of his own 
church, both in America and England. 

We deem it proper to state, that the Author 
has no pecuniary interest in the appearance of 
these Discourses, having given his consent gra- 
tuitously to their republication. To render the 
work more acceptable, we have inserted his like- 
ness, having had it engraved expressly for this 
volume. 

In the hope that it may awaken, among Luther- 
ans, a stronger attachment to their church, and 
draw forth their benevolence in supplying her 
wants ; give correct information to all who may de- 
sire to become better acquainted with the Ameri- 
can shoot of the trunk of Protestantism; strength- 
en the hands of our self-denying ministers in all 
their trials; and encourage the hearts of many of 
our people, who are yet destitute, and as sheep 
without a shepherd ; we send it forth, praying 
that the Great Head of the Church, without 



Vlll PREFACE. 

whose favor nothing can prosper, would own and 
bless it to the sanctification and salvation of 
many souls. 

D. HARBAUGH, 
J. B. BUTLER. 
Springfield, Ohio, August, 1851. 



CONTENTS 



I. DISCOURSE. 

RETROSPECT OF LUTHER ANISM IN THE UNITED STATES. A DIS 
COURSE DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENERAL SYNOD AT BALTI- 
MORE, 1841 ; AND PUBLISHED BY SAID BODY FOR GRATUITOUS 
DISTRIBUTION, 11 



II. DISCOURSE. 

PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. A DISCOURSE DELIVERED BY 
REQUEST, AT THE CONSECRATION OF THE FIRST ENGLISH 
LUTHERAN CHURCH IN PITTSBURG, OCT. 4, 1840, BEFORE THE 
SYNOD OF WEST PENNSYLVANIA, AAD PUBLISHED BY A RESO- 
LUTION OF SALD BODY, 41 



III. DISCOURSE, 

'HE PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM ; BEING A DIS- 
COURSE DELIVERED BEFORE THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF THE 
LUTHERAN CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES, DURING THE SES- 
SION OF THE GENERAL SYNOD IN PHILADELPHIA, MAY 17, 1845. 
AND PUBLISHED BY SAID SOCIETY, 90 



IV. DISCOURSE. 

THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST; 
NOW FIRST PUBLISHED, 120 



x CONTENTS. 

V. DISCOURSE. 

THE DOCTRINAL BASIS AND ECCLESIASTICAL POSITION OF THE 
AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH, 155 

VI. DISCOURSE. 

VOCATION OF THE AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH ; NOW FIRST 
PUBLISHED, 24? 



THE 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 



I. DISCOURSE. 

RETROSPECT OF LTJTHERANISM IN THE UNITED 
STATES. 

Remember the days of old, consider the years of many gener- 
ations, ask thy father and he will show thee, thy elders and 
they will tell thee. — Deut. xxxii. 7. 

Man, my brethren, we are told in the good book of God, 
is wonderfully and fearfully constructed. This is true not 
only of the tenement of clay which we inhabit, but far more 
illustriously true of the immortal mind, which mainly con- 
stitutes ourself. Possessed of powers of cognition, of feeling 
and of action, man is adapted for the high destiny marked 
out by the Almighty, for a sphere little lower than that of 
angels, encircled with honor and ^lory. As he journeys 
through life, he is surrounded on all sides by a certain ex- 
tent of intellectual vision, which, like the torch of the be- 
nighted traveler, forms a circle of illumination around him, 
in which he can safely direct his steps. His powers of cog- 
nition embrace a knowledge of the present, some certainties 
commingled with many probabilities in the future, and co- 
pious reminiscences of the past. The past is our richest and 
most instructive teacher ; and it was justly said by one of 
the most brilliant intellects of heathen antiquity, that not to 
know what happened before Ave were born is to remain al- 
ways a child. This power of retrospection sheds its influ* 



12 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

ence on every department of human life — on our social, ou r 
intellectual, and our religious interests. 

It is in this field of retrospection that the Christian finds 
many of his dearest social enjoyments. Fond memory de- 
lights to dwell on the pleasing and interesting associations of 
our early years, especially associations of effort in the cause 
of the Redeemer. And it is here, too, that " pensive memory 
retraces scenes of bliss forever fled/' it is here she "dwells 
in former times and places;" it is here she "holds com- 
munion with the dead." On this occasion, my brethren, these 
feelings rise commingled in my breast, when I see before 
me some of those beloved brethren, with whom I shared 
the toils of early ministerial life, and when I fail to see others, 
who twenty years ago were co-workers with us, but have 
gone to their rest. 

It is in the wide field of retrospection, that we gather our 
richest treasures of wisdom and experience. It is memory 
that enables us to appropriate to ourselves the knowledge and 
experience of past ages ; to hold communion with apostles 
and prophets and patriarchs, and virtually to extend our life 
from threescore to a thousand years. It is in the rich fields 
of retrospection, too, that the Christian finds the incidents, 
the principles, and many of the evidences of his holy re- 
ligion ; the glorious displays of Divine Providence, and the 
heavenly, the expansive power of that gospel, which, aided 
by the Spirit, serves in every age as the conductor of saving 
influences from heaven to man. In the Old Testament 
church, festivals were expressly appointed to cherish the 
memory of God's mercies to his people. And our blessed 
Saviour himself not only attended those festivals, instituted 
by Moses, but appointed a mnemonic rite in his own church, 
and seems not to have disregarded the feast of dedication 
which was of mere human appointment. John x. 22. 

But it is not only in the Old Testament dispensation that 
the hand of Providence and the power of God's word may 
be recognized. They are displayed with increased lustre in 
the developments of the New Testament church throughout 
her history. They are seen in the Reformation of the six- 
teenth century, when, after ages of concealment beneath the 
dust of ignorance and superstition, the seed of the word was 
brought to light and scattered among the people. They are 
seen in the history of Pietism in Germany, of the Methodist 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 13 

church, the Presbyterian, the Episcopal and other churches, 
and, we may add, in the History of our Lutheran Zion in 
these United States. Here, too, the precious seed scattered 
abroad by a few able and faithful servants of Christ, was 
richly watered by the Spirit, and produced abundant fruit to 
the praise of his grace ; and here, too, there are abundant 
materials for the recognition of his Providence. 

More than two hundred years have rolled away since the 
first disciples of Christ bearing the name of Luther, trav- 
ersed the mighty deep to seek a resting-place in this western 
world. For more than a century has an uninterrupted 
stream of immigration continued to swell their numbers, 
various and interesting and instructive are the incidents 
which have since transpired ; and as the improvement of 
such incidents is often enjoined in scripture, it may be well 
for us to adopt the language of Moses, when about to bid 
adieu to his brethren after the flesh : " Bemember the days of 
old, consider the years of many generations, ask thy father and 
he will show thee, thy elders and they will tell thee." This 
will be the more appropriate as we are assembled to delib- 
erate on the welfare of the church at large, and especially 
as we are on the eve of a centenary celebration, for which 
we are expected to make arrangements. It would, indeed, 
be more grateful to the feelings of the speaker, and we trust 
of those who hear him, if the contemplated celebration per- 
tained to the body of Christ at large, and not only to one 
branch of it ; yet if all invidious comparison be avoided, if 
with our reminiscences of the goodness of God to our Zion, 
we forget not his mercies to others, and cherish a deep sense 
of our unprofitableness ; in short, if the spirit of secta- 
rianism be, as I trust it will be, excluded from the celebration, 
it may tend to the glory of that Redeemer, who would have 
all his disciples regard each other as brethren, whilst they 
acknowledge, as their one and only Master, neither Luther, 
nor Zuingle, nor Calvin, nor Wesley, but Jesus Christ. 
With these views we invite your attention to 

A RETROSPECT OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH IN THE UNITED 
STATES. 

We shall 

I. Glance at the history itself; and, 

II. Consider several particular topics connected with it. 

2 



14 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

The history of this portion of Christ's kingdom naturally 
divides itself into three periods. The I. may be termed 
the Colonial -Era, extending from the first settlement of Lu- 
therans in this country, (about 1826,) to the Declaration of 
American Independence in 1776, and embraces about one 
hundred and fifty years. The II. extends from that period, 
to the establishment of the General Synod, in 1820, includ- 
ing forty-four years. This -maybe regarded as the middle 
era; and the III. from that period to the present time, which 
may be styled the era of the General Synod, and includes 
twenty years. 

I. THE COLONIAL ERA. 

The earliest settlement of Lutherans in this country, was 
made by emigrants from Holland to ISTew York, soon after 
the first establishment of the Dutch in that city, then called 
New Amsterdam, which was in 1621. This fact, which is 
of some historical interest, rests upon the authority of the 
venerable patriarch of American Lutheranism, Henry Mel- 
chior Muhlenberg. " As I was detained at ISTew York, (says 
he in his Report to Halle, 1 ) I took some pains to acquire 
correct information concerning the history of the Lutheran 
church in that city. This small congregation took its rise 
almost at the first settlement of the country. Whilst the ter- 
ritory yet belonged to Holland, the few Low Dutch Lu- 
therans were compelled to hold their worship in private ; 
but after it passed into the possession of the British, in 1664, 
liberty was granted them by all the successive governors to 
conduct their worship publicly without any obstruction." 2 
The establishment of Lutherans was, therefore, made little 
more than a century after the re- discovery of America by 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 360. 

(2) The Lutheran Herald, vol. iii, No. 1 , gives tts the following particulars : 
" Indeed, so great was the number of Lutherans, even at this time, that the 
very next year. 1665. after the English flag had been displayed from fort 
Amsterdam, they petitioned for liberty to send to Germany a call for a 
regular pastor. This petition Governor Nicols of course granted, and in 
February, 1669. two years after he had left the government, the Rev. 
Jacobus Eabricius arrived in the colony and began his pastoral labors." 
"On the 13th of October, 1669, Lord Lovelace, who had succeeded Gov. 
Nicols, publicly proclaimed his having received a letter from the Duke of 
York, expressing his pleasure that the Lutherans should be tolerated." 



R.E.TROSBECT OF LUTHERANISM, 15 

Columbus, in 1492; 1 within a few years of the landing of 
the Pilgrims on Plymouth rock, 1620, and whilst the Thirty 
Years' War 2 was raging in Germany, and threatening to 
exterminate Protestantism from Europe. Their first minister 
was Jacob Fabricius, who arrived in 1669, but after eight 
years' labor, left them and connected himself with the. Swed- 
ish Lutherans. 3 The names of his immediate successors we 
have not found ; but from 1703 to 1747, their pastors were 
the Rev. Messrs. Falkner ; from 1703 till 1725, Berkenmayer, 
and Knoll, and subsequently Rochemdahler, Wolf, Hart- 
wick and others. The first church (a log building,) was 
erected 1671, 4 and Mr. Muhlenberg says it was in a dilapi- 
dated state when it was taken down and its place supplied 
by one of stone, 5 in the time of Mr. Berkenmayer. The 
cause of the emigration from Holland we have not seen 
stated, but it may easily be conjectured, as the emigrants 
left that country a few years after the famous Synod of Dort 
(1618,) and whilst the government was enforcing the intoler- 
ant decrees of that body. 

To this settlement succeeded that of the Swedes on the 
Delaware, in 1636, about ten or twelve years after that in 
]N"ew Amsterdam, and sixteen years after the arrival of the 
pilgrims at Plymouth. This colony was first contemplated 
during the reign of Gustavus Adolphus, and was sanctioned 
by that enlightened and illustrious king. It was delayed by 
the commencement of the Thirty Years' War in Germany ; 
but after Sweden's noble-hearted monarch had poured out 
his life's-blood on the plains of Lutzen, it was revived and 
executed under the auspices of his distinguished prime min- 

(1) It is now fully established that America was not first discovered by Co- 
lumbus ; but Greenland had been visited by Eirek, the Red, and New Eng- 
land by Biarni Heriulpkson, the former in 982, the latter in 985. See 
Discoveries of the North Men. 

(2) This most memorable of all the wars in the history of Protestantism, 
wbicb deluged Germany in blood, and had it not been for the magnanimous 
aid of Gustavus Adolphus and his brave Swedes, would perhaps have extir- 
pated Protestantism from the earth, was commenced in 1618 and ended in 
1648. 

(3) Clay's Annals, &c, p. 150. Fabricius took charge of the Swedish 
church at Wicaco. now Southwark, Philadelphia, where ^ he labored four- 
teen years, during nine of which he was blind. He died 1692. 

(4) Lutheran Herald, vol. iii. p. 51. (5) Halliche Nachrichten, p. 363. 



16 RETROSPECT OF LI7TH E RANIS M. 

ister, Oxenstiern. 1 For many years this colony prospered, 
but receiving no accessions from the parent country, it never 
increased much in numbers ; the rising generation com- 
mingled with the surrounding English and Germans, and at 
the present day the Swedish language is entirely abandoned 
in their worship. For many years their ministers, who 
were generally men of sterling character, were in habits of 
the most friendly intercourse and ecclesiastical co-operation 
with their German Lutheran brethren ; but the prevalence 
of the English language having early placed them under 
obligation to our Episcopal brethren, who supplied them with 
ministrations in that language, these churches, three or four 
in number, have successively fallen into Episcopal hands. 2 

The third settlement of Lutherans in this country was 
that of the Germans, which gradually spread over Pennsyl- 
vania, Maryland, Virginia and the interior of New York and 
the Western States. The grant of Pennsylvania was given 
to Penn by Charles II. in 1680, and from this date, till about 
twenty years afterward, many hundreds of families emigrated 
to Pennsylvania. The tide of German emigration, however, 
fairly commenced in 1710, when about three thousand Ger- 
mans, chiefly Lutheran, oppressed by Romish intolerance, 
went from the Palatinate to England in 1709, and were sent 
by Queen Ann to New York the succeeding year. In 1713 
one hundred and fifty families settled in Schoharie ; and in 
1717, we find in the Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, that 
the Governor of the province felt it his duty to call the atten- 
tion of the "Provincial Council" to the fact, "that great 
numbers of foreigners from Germany, strangers to our lan- 
guage and constitution, had lately been imported into the 
province." The council enacted that every master of a ves- 
sel should report the emigrants he brought over, and that 
they should all repair to Philadelphia within one month to take 
the oath of allegiance to the government, 3 that it might be 
seen whether they were "friends or enemies to his majesty's 

(1) Clay's Annals of the Swedes, p. 16. 

(2) That these churches have dwindled away to almost nothing, would seem 
to appear from the fact, that when their present amiable rector, the Rev. J. 
C. Clay, was elected, December 5th, 1831, the entire number of votes given, 
was, at the Wicaco church (Philadelphia,) 16, at Upper Merion 29;, and at 
Kingsessing37. Clay's Annals ; p. 133.' 

(3) Colonial Records, vol, iii, p ; 18. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN1SM. 17 

government." In 1727, the year memorable alike for 
Francke's death and the origin of the Moravians, a very 
large number of Germans came to Pennsylvania from the 
Palatinate from Wurtemberg, Darmstadt and other parts of 
Germany. This colony was long destitute of a regular min- 
istry ; there were however some schoolmasters and others, 
some of whom were probably good men, who undertook to 
preach ; and as many of the emigrants brought with them 
the spirit of true piety from Germany, they brought also 
many devotional books, and often read Arndt's True Chris- 
tianity and other similar works for mutual edification. 1 For 
twelve years, from 1730 till the arrival of the patriarch of 
American Lutheranism, Dr. Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, 
the Swedish ministers kindly labored among the Germans, 
as far as their duties to their own churches admitted. But 
before we pursue the history of this colony. any farther, our ; 
attention is claimed by 

The fourth settlement of Lutherans in this country, who 
established themselves in Georgia, in 1733, and to designate 
the gratitude of their hearts to the God who had protected 
them, styled their location Ebenezer. These emigrants 
were from Saltzburg, formerly belonging to Bavaria* and 
restored to the Austrian dominions at the peace of 1814. 
Persecuted at home by those enemies of all righteousness, 
the Jesuits, 2 and by Romish priests and Romish rulers, this 
band of disciples sought a resting-place in these western 
wilds, where they could worship God according to the 
dictates of their consciences, under their own vine and fig- 
tree, without molestation or fear. Through the instrument- 
ality of Rev. Urlsperger, of Augsburg, who was a corres- 
ponding member of the British Society for the Promotion of 
Christianity, pecuniary aid was afforded by that liberal and 
noble-minded association, and the oppressed Saltzburgers en- 
abled to reach, the place of their destination. Happily, they 
were immediately supplied by two able and faithful pastors, 
Messrs. Bolzius and Gronau. The latter was taken away by 
death after twelve years labor among the emigrants, but 
Bolzius was spared to the church about thirty years. In 
1738 these colonists erected an orphan house at Ebenezer, 

(1) See Hallische Nachricliteii, p. 665, • (2) Heinsius' unparteiiseli Kiy= 
chen historie, vol. hi. p. 291. 
2a 



18 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 

to which work of benevolence important aid was contributed 
by that, distinguished man of God, George Whitefield, who 
also furnished the bell for one of the churches erected by 
them. The descendants of these colonists are still numer- 
ous, and are connected with the Lutheran synod of South 
Carolina and adjacent states. 

Soon after the above colonization, numerous Germans 
coming from Pennsylvania and other states, settled in North 
Carolina, 1 who enjoyed the labors of many excellent ser- 
vants of Christ — Nussman, Arndt, Storch, Roschen, Bern- 
hard, Shober and others, and whose descendants constitute 
the present numerous churches in the Carolinas. 

In 1735 a settlement of Lutherans was formed in Spottsyl- 
vania, as Virginia was then sometimes called, 2 which we 
suppose to be the church in Madison county of that state. 
Their pastor, the Rev. Stoever, visited Germany for aid, 
and together with several assistants obtained three thou- 
sand pounds, part of which was expended in the erection 
of a church, the purchase of a plantation and slaves to 
work it for the support of their minister, and the balance 
expended for a library, or consumed by the expenses of the 
town. 2 As might have been expected, this church seems 
never to have enjoyed the smiles of our Father in Heaven. 

In 1739 a few Germans, emigrated to Waldoborough, 
Maine, to whose number an addition of fifteen hundred souls 
was made thirteen years afterward. But the title to the land 
given them by General Waldo proving unsound, many left 
the colony, and its numbers have never greatly increased. 
For many years they enjoyed the pastoral labors, success- 
ively of Rev. Schaeffer (from 1762,) Croner (from 1785,) 
and Ritz, and since 1811 are under the charge of Rev. Mr. 
Starman. 3 

Of all these colonies that which in the Providence of God 
has most increased, and has hitherto constituted the great 
body of the Lutheran church in this country, is that in the 

(1) Shober's Luther, p. 137. (2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 331. 

(3) Heinsius speaks of a colony of Swiss Lutherans, who tired of Romish 
oppression, also sought refuge in this Western world. They came by way 
of England, under the direction of Col. Purry, who established them in a 
place called after himself Purrysburg. This colony, if we mistake not, 
was also in Georgia, but we have not been able to find any account of its 
progress or present condition. Heinsius' Kirchengeschichte, vol. iii. p„ 291 „ 



EETROSPECT OF LUTHER AS ISM. 19 

Middle states, Pennsylvania, interior Xew York, Maryland, 
fee., whose history was traced in its proper place till 1742. 
This was a memorable year for the Lutheran church. It 
was rendered so by the arrival of Henry Melchior Muhlen- 
berg, whose high intellectual and moral qualifications, whose 
indefatigable zeal and lono- life of arduous and enlightened 
labor for the Master's cause, constitute a new era in the his- 
tory of our American Zion, and justly entitle him to the ap- 
pellation of patriarch of the American Lutheran church. 
There had indeed been Lutherans in Pennsylvania sixty 
years earlier. There had been churches built at New Han- 
over, and near Lebanon (the Bergkircke,) where the Rev. 
Stover labored in 1733, and at York in 1734. In Philadel- 
phia also the Lutherans had worshipped jointly with their 
Reformed brethren in an old log house in Arch street. But 
in general they had enjoyed no regular ministry, until 1742. 
Muhlenberg came to this country with qualifications of the 
highest order. His education was of the very first char- 
acter. In addition to his knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, 
he spoke English, German, Holland, French, Latin and Swe- 
dish. But what was still more important, he was edu- 
cated in the school of Francke, and had imbibed a large 
portion of his heavenly spirit. Like Paul, he had an ardent 
zeal for the salvation of '-'his brethren, his kinsmen accord- 
ing to the flesh." He first landed in Georgia, and spent a 
week with the brethren, Bolzius and Gronau, to refresh his 
spirit and learn the circumstances of the country; and then 
pursuing his course by a dangerous coasting voyage, in a 
small and insecure sloop, 1 which had no accommodations 
for passengers, he arrived in Philadelphia, Xov. 25, 1742. 
Having reached his place of destination, and surmounted 
the opposition of Count Zinzendorf, who, under the assumed 
name of Thurnsiein, had passed himself off as a Lutheran 
minister and inspector, 2 he was cordially received, and en- 

(1) During this voyage all on board endured many privations ; and being 
delayed and tossed about by contrary winds, suffered much for want of water. 
So great was the destitution of water, that even the rats ate ont the stoppers 
of the vinegar bottles, and by inserting their tails, extracted the cooling 
liquid, and drew them through their mouths. And some of these animals 
were also seen licking the perspiration from the foreheads of the sleeping 
mariners. Hallische Xachrichten. p. 9. 

(2) The writer has m his library a volume of sermons, published in Bud- 
ingen 1746, evidently by Count Zinzendorl in which the writer on the title 



20 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

tered on his labors with comprehensive and well-directed 
views for the benefit of the whole church. He continued 
to labor for near a half a century, with indefatigable zeal. 
Whilst Edwards was co-operating with the extraordinary 
outpourings of God's spirit in New England, and the Wes- 
leys were laboring to revive vital godliness in England ; 
whilst Whitefield was doing the same work in England and 
America, and the successors of Francke were laboring to 
evangelize Germany ; Muhlenberg was striving with similar 
zeal and fidelity to do the work of God among his German 
brethren in this Western world. Of him, as also of some 
of his earliest associates, it may be truly said, that, " he was 
in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, 
in perils by his own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, 
in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in 
the sea, in perils among false brethren, in weariness and 
painfullness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fast- 
ings often, and in cold and nakedness." He preached in 
season and out of season, in churches, in dwellings, in barns 
and in the open air, until at last that divine Master, whom 
he so faithfully served, received him into the society of the 
apostles and prophets at his right hand. 

Such was Muhlenberg. Throughout his long life he was 
regarded by all as the leader of the Lutheran phalanx, as 
the father of the Lutheran church in this country. Although 
we see no necessity for attaching a season of grateful ac- 
knowledgment of the Divine goodnes, to any specinc date, 
as it is at all times proper ; yet if such a date be sought, 
no one more appropriate could be found than the year of 
Muhlenberg's call to this work, (September, 1741,) 1 or his 
actual arrival in this country in 1742. 

Muhlenberg was soon joined in the American field by 
other highly respectable men, of excellent education and of 
spirit like his own ; the greater part of whom were in like 
manner sent from Germany, such as Brunnholtz and Lemke, 
1745; Handshuh, Hartwick, the generous founder of the 
seminary that bears his name, and Weygand, 1748 ; Hein- 
zelman and Schultz, 1751; Gerock, Hausil, Wortman, Waff- 



age is represented to nave been Lutheran Inspector and Pastor in Phila- 
elphiain 1742. 

(1) Hallische Nachrienten, p. 7. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 21 

ner, Schartlin, Shrenk and Rauss, 1753 ; Bager, 1758 ; Voigt 
and Krug, 1764; Helmuth and Schmidt, 1769 ; and Kunze, 
1770. In company with Mr. Brunnholtz came also Messrs. 
N. Kurtz and Schaum, who were ordained in 1748 and 
were among the most faithful and useful of our ministers. 
The former was the father of the venerable servant of 
Christ, whom we are permitted this morning to welcome in 
our midst, the oldest Lutheran minister in the United States, 
bereft of late of the partner of his life, himself yet kindly 
spared amongst us as a relic of a former generation. The 
increase of ministers was slow. When the first Synod was 
held, in 1748, there were only eleven regular Lutheran 
ministers in the United States. 1 Three years after that 
time the number of congregations was rated at about forty, 
and the Lutheran population in America at sixty thousand. 
The greater part of these men were indefatigable in their 
labors. Numerous and arduous were the difficulties in their 
way. The population was unsettled, ever tending farther 
into the interior ; 2 intemperance had already made sad havoc 
in the land ; 3 the semi-civilized habits so natural to pioneers 
in colonization, the various frolics, the celebrations in honor 
of Tammany, the Indian chief, &c, which were then ex- 
tensively observed, 4 were formidable obstacles to religion. 
Inadequate ministerial support ; difficulty of traveling from 
want of roads in many directions ; and not unfrequently the 
tomahawk and scalping knife of the Indian impeded their 
progress. I cannot stop to tell the soul-stirring story of 
many an Indian massacre. A single instance, from the pen 
of father Muhlenberg himself, may teach us alike to ap- 
preciate the security of our worship and the bitter cost at 
which our fathers provided it ; may teach us that we are 
reaping the fruits of their sweat and blood. The case was 
that of a man whose two grown daughters had attended a 
course of instruction by Mr. Muhlenberg, and been solemnly 
admitted by confirmation to the communion of the church. 
This man afterwards went with his family some distance 
into the interior to a tract of land which he purchased. 

(1) In 1743, Naesseman, the Swedish minister, reported to Sweden, that 
there were at that time twenty German Lutheran congregations in Amer- 
ica. Heinsius, iii, p. 687. 

(2) Muhlenbnrg states that in five years half his congregation had 
changed. (3) Hal. Nach. p. 474. (4) Hall. Nach, p. 1441. 



22 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN LSM. 

When the war with the Indians broke out, he removed his 
family to their former residence, and occasionally returned 
to his farm to attend to his grain and cattle. On one occa- 
sion he went accompanied by his two daughters to spend a 
few days there, and bring away some wheat. On Friday 
evening after the wagon had been loaded, and everything 
was ready for their return on the morrow, his daughters 
complained that they felt anxious and dejected, and were 
impressed with the idea that they were soon to die.. They 
requested their father to unite with them in singing the fa- 
miliar German funeral hymn : "Who knows how near my 
end may be," 1 after which they commended themselves to 
God in prayer and retired to rest. The light of the suc- 
ceeding morning beamed upon them and all was yet well. 
Whilst the daughters were attending to the dairy, cheered 
with the joyful hope of soon greeting their friends, and being 
out of danger, the father went to the field for the horses, 
to prepare for their departure home. As he was passing 
through the field, suddenly he saw two Indians, armed with 
rifles, tomahawks and scalping knives, rushing towards him 
at full speed. The sight so terrified him, that he lost all 
self-command and stood motionless and silent. When they 
were about twenty yards from him, he suddenly, and with 
all his strength, exclaimed : " Lord Jesus, living and dying 
I am thine." Scarcely had the Indians heard the words, 
"Lord Jesus," (which they probably knew as the white 
man's name of the "Great Spirit,") when they stopped 
short, and uttered a hideous yell. The man ran with al- 
most supernatural strength into the dense forest, and by 
taking a serpentine course the Indians lost sight of him and 
relinquished the pursuit. He hastened to an adjoining 
farm, where two German families resided, for assistance. 
Bat on approaching near it, he heard the dying groans of 
the families, who were falling beneath the murderous toma- 
hawk of some other Indians. Having providentially not 
been observed by them, he hastened back to learn the fate 
of his daughters. But, alas ! on coming within sight, he 
found his house, barn and stable, enveloped in flames ! 
Finding that the Indians had possession here, too, he has- 
tened to an adjoining farm for help. Returning armed, 

(1) The well known German hymn, "Wer weisz wie nahe mir mein Ende." 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHER ANISM. 23 

with several men, they found the house reduced to ashes, 
and the Indians gone ! His eldest daughter had been al- 
most entirely burnt up, a few remains only of her body 
being found ! And awful to relate, the younger, though the 
scalp had been cut from her head, and her body was hor- 
ribly mangled from head to foot with the tomahawk, was 
yet living! "The poor worm," says Muhlenberg, "was 
yet able to state all the circumstances of the dreadful 
scene." After having done so, she requested her father to 
stoop dewn to her that she might give him a parting kiss 
and then go to her dear Savior, and after she had im- 
pressed her dying lips upon his cheek, she yielded her 
spirit into the hands of that Redeemer, 1 who, though his 
judgments are often unsearchable and his ways past finding- 
out, has nevertheless said, "I am the resurrection and the 
life, if any man believe in me, though he die yet shall he 
live." 

Such were the difficulties and dangers with which our 
fathers had to contend, in planting the gospel in these 
western wilds. But we must pass on to glance at the 
second, or 

MIDDLE ERA OF OUR CHURCH IN THIS COUNTRY. 

The event selected as the division between the first and 
second periods of our retrospect, is one illustrious in the 
annals of the world. It separates between the reign of 
different political theories, the divine right of kings to gov- 
ern the people, and the people's right to govern themselves; 
between the principles of liberty and slavery; between the 
union of church and state, which had prevailed in Europe 
since its establishment by Constantine about fourteen hun- 
dred years before, and absolute liberty of conscience un- 



(1) Hallish. Nadir . p. 1007, 8. The case here narrated was neither ex- 
treme nor rare. The elder Mr. Kurtz on the 2d of July. 1757, states 
that on that day, the lifeless bodies of no less than seven members of his 
congregation were brought to the church for burial, they having been 
murdered by the Indians the evening before. Being anxious to improve 
this solemn scene tothe spiritual welfare of his hearers, Mr. Kurtz deferred 
the interment until the succeeding day. and suffered the mangled bodies to 
remain in the church until the congregation convened ; a pleasing evidence 
this, of his solicitude for souls. 



24 RETROSPECT OP LtJTHER AN ISM. 

controlled by civil governments. But the struggle by which 
this glorious declaration of Independence was sustained, and 
in which our forefathers took a distinguished part, was like 
every other war, detrimental to the religious prosperity of 
the community. Christianity is a religion of peace, and the 
tempest of war never fails to blast and scatter the leaves 
which are for the healing of nations. Hear the account of 
one of those venerable men, the Rev. Dr. Helmuth, just 
after General Gage had landed at Boston with 9000 British 
troops, dated Feb. 25th, 1775. "Throughout the whole 
country great preparations for war are making, and almost 
every person is under arms. The ardor is indescribable 
which is manifested in these melancholy circumstances. If 
a hundred men are required, many more immediately offer, 
and are dissatisfied when all are not accepted. I know of 
no similar case in history. Neighborhoods concerning which 
it would have been expected, that years would be requisite 
to induce them volutarily to take up arms, became strongly 
inclined for war, so soon as the battle of Lexington was 
known. Quakers and Menonists take part in the military 
exercises, and in great numbers renounce their former re- 
ligious principles. The hoarse din of war is hourly heard 
in our streets. The present disturbances inflict no small in- 
jury on religion. Every body is constantly on the alert, 
anxious, like the ancient Athenians, to hear the news, and 
amid the mass of news the hearts of men are, alas ! closed 
against the good old word of God. The Lord is chastising 
the people, but they do not feel it. Those who appear to 
be distant from danger are unconcerned ; and those whom 
calamity has overtaken are enraged and meditating ven- 
geance. In the American army there are many clerg3 T men, 
who serve both as chaplains and as officers. I myself know 
two, one of whom is a Colonel and the other a Captain. 
The whole country is in a perfect enthusiasm for liberty. 
The whole population from New England to Georgia is of 
one mind, and determined to risk life and all things in de- 
fence of liberty. The few who think differently are not per- 
mitted to utter their sentiments. In Philadelphia the English 
and German students are formed into military companies, 
wear uniform, and are exercised like regular troops. Would 
to God that men would once become as zealous and unan- 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 25 

imous in asserting their spiritual liberty, as they are in vin- 
dicating their political freedom ! l 

This melancholy state of things lasted upwards of seven 
years. Many of the churches were destroyed throughout 
the land, and especially in New England. Zion's church, 
the largest in Philadelphia, was occupied as a hospital 2 by 
the British army in 1778, and the congregation for a season 
wholly expelled ; and their other church, St. Michaels, which 
had been built 1743, the year after Muhlenberg'^ arrival, 
was used by the enemy as a. garrison church, half of every 
Lord's day, the congregation having the use of it in the af- 
ternoon. Curing the ravages of this war, no regular reports 
were forwarded to Halle, and our acquaintance with the par- 
ticulars of our history is necessarily circumscribed. Many, 
however, of the fathers of the church survived the revolu- 
tionary struggle, and remained in the field during the earlier 
part of this period ; yet one by one they dropped off, and 
were received to their eternal res-t. From the (Kirchena- 
gende) " Directory for Worship," published in 1786, three 
years after the Independence of these United States was 
acknowledged by Britain and the war closed, we learn, that 
at that time our ministry in the Middle States embraced the 
following twenty-four persons : Henry Melchior Muhlen- 
berg, D. D., senior of the ministerium, Nicholas Kurtz, his 
younger brother William Kurtz, Lewis Voigt, John Andrew 
Krug, Christian Imanuel Schultze, John George Bager, Just 
Christian Henry Helmuth, D. D., John Frederick Schmidt, 
John Christopher Kunze, D. D., Gotthilf, Henry Ernst 
Muhlenberg, D. D., Conrad Wildbahn, Jacob B. Buskirk, John 
Friderici, Christian Streit, John George Jung, Conrad Roel- 
ler, Jacob Georing, Daniel Schroeter, Daniel Lehman, Henry 
Moeller, Frederick Ernst, Frederick Valentine Melsheimer, 
and Daniel Kurtz, D. D. 

In addition to these, the following laborers among many 
others, entered the field during the second period, and car- 
ried forward the work of the Lord: John Frederick Wein- 
land, Frederick David Schaefier, D. D., Wm. Carpenter, 
George Lochman, D. D., John George Schmucker, D. D., 
Christian Endress, D. D., Ernest L. Hazelius, D. D., Philip 

(1) Hallische Nachi-icMen, p. 1367, 8. 

(2) Hallisclie Nachrichten p. 1408. 

3 



126 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 

F. Mayer, D. D., John Bachman, D. D., Jolm Ruthrauff, 
George Flohr, Paul Henkel, John Staunch, F. W. Geissen- 
hainer, D. D., Augustus Wackerhagen, D. D., G. A. Lint- 
ner, D. D., G. B. Miller, D. D., Jno. Herbst, John Knosky, 
H. Muhlenberg, D. D., David F. Schaeffer, D. D., John 
Hecht, Jacob Miller, D. D., Ulrich, Baetis, Ernst, D. D., J. 
Becker, D. D., F. C. Schaeffer, D. D., J. P. Shindel, A. 
Reck, B. Kurtz, D. D. 

The number of congregations and ministers was much 
increased during this period ; but owing to the want of a 
suitable institution for their education and to other causes, 
the proportion of men destitute of a learned education was 
also augmented. Nor can it be denied, that, whether it is 
attributable to the unhallowed influence of the war, or to 
this and other causes in conjunction, the standard of piety in 
the churches was somewhat on the decline, especially in the 
latter part of this period. As the same remark is also ap- 
plicable to all the other religious denominations of our land, 
the war of the Revolution and the war with England in 1812, 
were most probably its principal reason ; for a general effect 
requires an equally general cause. With this cause co-ope- 
rated another, almost as influential, the general and unpre- 
cedented facilities offered by our young and nascent country 
to accumulate deceitful riches, and to neglect the treasures 
in heaven ; and also the less pious character of the late ac- 
cessions made to our churches by emigration from Germany, 
then devastated and demoralized by the deadly poison of 
war. 

In addition to their pastoral labors, several of our princi- 
pal men occupied important posts in literary institutions. 
Dr. Kunze was professor of the Greek, Latin and German 
languages, in the University of Pennsylvania, established in 
1779; in 1785 Dr. Helmuth was appointed to the same 
station ; and they were confessedly as learned men as any 
connected with the institution. At this time the Academy 
which had previously existed, was converted into a prepar- 
atory school to prepare German youth to understand the in- 
structions of the University. 

In 1786, the Kirchenagende was published, which con- 
tinued in use during nearly the whole of this period until in 
1818, the one now employed in our German churches, was 
published. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 27 

In 1787, the Legislature out of gratitude for the revolu- 
tionary services of the Germans, and respect for their in- 
dustry and excellence as citizens, endowed a college in Lan- 
caster for their special benefit, to be forever under their 
control. Of this institution Dr. Muhlenberg, then pastor in 
Lancaster, was chosen president. And in 1791, the same 
body passed an act, appropriating 5000 acres of land to the 
flourishing free school of the Lutheran church in Philadel- 
phia, in which at that time eighty poor children were receiv- 
ing gratuitous education. 

In 1796, at which time the difficulties resulting from the 

conflict between the German and English languages, that 

tit 
prolific source of endless evils to our churches, already be- 
gan to appear, there was a very enlarged and enlightened 
plan for the establishment of a German and English school 
with five teachers, devised, and if we mistake not, put into 
operation ; but for reasons which we do not find on record, 
it seems soon to have been abandoned. 

Had this plan been persisted in, and as a necessary con- 
comitant, suitable provision been made to have the doctrines 
of the gospel preached in English to those who could not 
understand German, the Lutheran church might at this day 
be as numerous as any other in Philadelphia. But in pursu- 
ance of a policy which we cannot but regard as mistaken, 
every effort to introduce English preaching was, until about 
the close of this period, met with determined opposition. 
Much may, however, be said on both sides of this question. 
Emigration 1 was still going on rapidly, and as the increas- 
ing numbers of German congregations gave full employment 
to all the laborers in the field, and filled up the places of 
those who left the church ; it is perhaps less matter of sur- 
prise than regret, that the fathers of that era, made no pro- 
vision for the porion of the rising generation unacquainted 
with the German language. 

At the request of the Philadelphia church council, their 

(1) In 1785, a German Society was established in New York, of which 
Dr. Kunze was an active member, and in which Baron Steuben, celebrated 
in our revolutionary struggle, took a deep interest, the object of which was 
alike to encourage emigration from Germany and to protect the rights of 
those who seek a home amongst us. Similar societies had previously ex^ 
isted in Philadelphia and Baltimore. Hall. Nach. p. 1508, 1518. 



28 RETROSPECT OF LUTHER AN IS M. 

pastors, 1791, addressed a pamphlet to the Lutherans of 
that city, on the signal evidences of the divine goodness and 
mercy to them, calling on them, to acknowledge and 
evince their gratitude by upholding their German re- 
ligious institutions and language. It was published on oc- 
casion of the re-opening of St. Michael's church, after a 
thorough repair ; and amidst much most excellent religious 
instruction, states the fact, that three of the largest churches 
in the city would not contain all the descendants of the Ger- 
man fathers, if they were animated by the zeal which char- 
acterized their ancestors in 1742. There is one incident 
in the early history of our German churches in Philadel- 
phia, affording so striking an evidence of the proverbial in- 
tegrity of the German character, that it deserves to be 
particularly noted. The corporation paid a large debt due 
by the church, to some mechanics, in continental money, 
when, that money was at par. Soon after, however, that 
currency depreciated to almost nothing, and of course the 
loss both in law and equity would have fallen on those in 
whose possession the notes were at the time found. But our 
noble hearted German fathers could not bear the thought, 
that any one should lose upon money received from them, 
and though they were not under the least obligation to do 
so, they actually made up the entire deficiency and paid the 
debt a second time in gold and silver! In that same 
church, there was as early as 1804 a flourishing Sabbath 
school of two hundred scholars and forty teachers, a con- 
clusive evidence that the cause of God was prospering at 
that time. 

Although the influx of ministers from Germany had di- 
minished near the close of this middle era ; the bond of 
Christian sympathy and union between us and the mother 
country, was by no means either severed or impaired. Of 
this a pleasing demonstration was afforded in 1814. When 
Halle, the mother of our central American church, the alma 
mater of Muhlenberg, of Handschuh, Heinzelman, Schultz, 
of Eager, of Voigt, of Krug, of Helmuth, of Schmidt and 
others, had greatly suffered by the devastation of the Buona- 
partean wars, collections were taken here, with great prompt- 
ness, and forwarded to Halle, amounting to two thousand 
three hundred and thirty-four dollars, and ten cents ;■- a 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN1SM. 29 

specimen of Christian sympathy this, which was liberally 
repaid, when in 182G, Dr. Benjamin Kurtz visited Germany 
in behalf of the Theological Seminary of this Synod. 

About the close of this period the state of piety in the 
American churches generally was improving, and a clearer 
day began to dawn also on our Lutheran Zion. 

III. The Third Period we style the era of the General 
Synod, because the formation of 'this noble institution, was a 
starting place and a central radiating point of improvement 
in the church, whose influence has been uninterrupted and 
most propitious ; and not entirely confined to the Synods 
which formally acceded to the union. Prior to this era the 
church had gradually become divided into five or six dif- 
ferent, distant, and unconnected Synods. Having no regular 
intercourse with each other, these several portions became 
more or less estranged ; and lost all the advantages of mutual 
consultation, confidence and co-operation. But a number 
of the most enlightened and active men in different portions • 
of the church lamented its decline, and resolved on efforts' 
for its improvement. The first of these efforts, and that ■ 
which brought in its train many others of blessed in- - 
fluence, was the establishment of the General Synod in 
1820, whose stated meeting has convened us on this occa- 
sion. 

The particular circumstances attending the formation and 
growth of this blessed institution are known to you all, and 
our time will not allow us to narrate them. Nor will deli- 
cacy permit us in the presence of some of them, to speak, 
as they deserve, of that noble band of brethren, who were 
foremost to repel the onset and the outcry against this Synod 
and bear it onward to victory and triumph ; nor of that band 
of younger brethren, who, when the recession of the mother 
Synod of Pennsylvania threatened certain dissolution to this 
body, stepped forward and nobly sustained it against fearful 
odds, until the storm was overblown, and by a course of 
well-doing the prejudices of some and apprehensions of 
others were removed. 

Much might be said of the spirit of brotherly love, of 
union and of piety which this Synod tended to diffuse ; and 
of the Theological Seminary established by this body, in * 

3a 



SO RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

which upwards of one hundred 1 laborers have been trained 
for the vineyard of the Lord. 

Powerful and extensive has been the influence of this 
body in introducing scriptural discipline into our churches, 
and promoting correct views of church government. 

Most salutary has doubtless been the influence of that selec- 
tion of ardently pious and evangelical hymns published by this 
Synod, by which hundreds of thousands of souls have been 
aided in their devotions and taught to sing the songs of Zion 
in their pilgrimage toward the heavenly Jerusalem. 

Much might be said of the honorable manner in which 
the greater part of the brethren and churches in E ast Penn- 
sylvania, and elsewhere, whilst yielding to the prejudices 
of the weaker members, yet continued to afford their sub- 
stantial and increasing aid to every good work undertaken 
by this Synod, so that much of the credit for what has 
been achieved, is justly due to their co-operation. 

In other Synods not connected with the General Synod, 
a similar spirit of improvement characterizes this age. 
Upon the whole, therefore, the Lutheran portion of the Re- 
deemer's kingdom in this country has, during the third pe- 
riod, been making rapid strides in improvement. This era 
is also distinguished by the establishment of the theological 
seminaries at Hartwick, which is the oldest of all, at Lex- 
ington and at Columbus ; all of which are doing an im- 
portant work for the church and age. The general progress 
of the church is demonstrated by the fact, that at the com- 
mencement of this era, there were but one hundred and 
forty Lutheran ministers* in the United States, and at the 
present day we number four hundred and six. 2 With this 
cursory review of our past history, we hasten in the 

II. PLACE, TO GLANCE AT SOME SELECT TOPICS CONNECTED 
WITH IT. 

Our first topic for observation shall .be the character of 
the church government and Discipline adopted by the fathers 

(1) Now, (1851.)the number of those who have been connected with 
the Seminary, has increased to 259. 

* Synod of Pennsylvania, including Maryland and Virginia, contained 
74 ministers ; Synod of Ohio, 23 ; North Carolina, 15 ; South Carolina, 10 ; 
and New lork 10. (2) Now, 771. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHER AN ISM. 31 

ef our American branch of the church. Though coming 
from a country, where the union of church and state, as 
well as other circumstances, prevented the early Reformers 
from restoring church government and discipline to its prim- 
itive and apostolic form ; when our fathers reached this- 
land of liberty they at once adopted the form which Luther 
and Lutheran divines generally, have always regarded as 
the primitive one, namely parity of ministers, the co-ope- 
ration of the laity 1 in church government, and the free volun- 
tary convention of Synods. Six years after the arrival of 
father Muhlenberg, the first Synod was held in Philadel- 
phia, August 14th, 1748. Even at this first Synod, lay del- 
egates were in attendance, and regularly participated in the 
transaction of business. 2 The character of this and the 
subsequent Synods and conferences, was interesting in the 
extreme, and breathed a spirit truly apostolic. The time 
was spent in administering the affairs of the churches and 
in pastoral consultation ; and such was the zeal and interest of 
the brethren, that they repeatedly during the same con- 
ference, continued their pastoral consultations till three- 
o'clock in the morning, communing together about the 
things pertaining to the kingdom of God. But hear Muh- 
lenberg himself. Speaking of a Synod held in 1760, at 
]STew Providence, a village, then the place of his residence, 
and now called Trap, after Rev. Gerock had preached a 
German sermon in the forenoon, and the excellent Provost 
Wrangel of the Swedish church, an English discourse in 
the afternoon, he says : " After the close of public worship 
all the ministers convened at my house, and held a biblical 
colloquy (colloquium biblicum) on the essential character- 
istics of genuine repentance, faith, and godliness ; in which 
they endeavored to benefit each other according to the 
grace given them, by communicating the results of their 
own experience and self-examination, so that it was a 
cheering and delightful season. The residue of the even- 
ing was spent in singing spiritual hymns and psalms and in 
conversation about the spiritual condition of our churches ; 
and so short did the time appear, that it was 3 o'clock in 
the morning before we retired to rest. Oh, (he adds) how 
delightful it is when ministers, standing aloof from all po- 

(I) Hallisete Nachrichten, p, 968, (2) p.. 284, 286. 



3Z RETROSPECT OF LUTHER AN ISM. 

litical and party contests, seek to please their Loid and 
Master Jesus Christ, and have at heart the welfare of their 
churches and the souls entrusted to their care; and are 
willing rather to suffer reproach with the people of God, 
than choose the treasures of Egypt." 1 

Of their practice to require the laity to unite in the vo- 
cation of ministers, we have a decided instance in the case 
of that distinguished and laborious servant of G-od, the 
Rev. Nicholas Kurtz. After his examination in 1748, by 
Messrs. Muhlenberg, Brunnholtz, Handschuh and Hart- 
wick, we are told, the elders and deacons of the church in 
which he had labored as a licentiate, were called on to sign 
his vocation. 2 

In matters of discipline also, the church took part. When 
members had been guilty of any grievous and public of- 
fense, Muhlenberg required them to appear publicly in 
church before the altar, and profess their penitence ; after 
which he called on the members to decide by vote, whether 
the individual should be restored to the privileges of church- 
membership* and especially of sacramental communion. 3 

As to the character of their discipline, it was evidently 
scriptural and evangelical. They practiced the public ex- 
communication of immoral members from the church. Dif- 
ferent instances of this practice are detailed in the journals 
of Muhlenberg, 4 of Helmuth 5 and others, In 1772 Hel- 
muth, in order more effectually to prevent the approach of 
unworthy members, introduced the practice of requiring all 
who desired to commune, to communicate their names to 
him before hand. 6 The register of names was read before 
the congregation, and those of immoral members publicly 
erased. Father Muhlenberg introduced a very scriptural 
discipline in the Lancaster church, of which his successor, 
Dr. Helmuth, speaks in terms of high commendation. One 
of the same character was introduced in the Philadelphia 
church in 1663, which gave to the pastors power to reject 
all immoral members from the sacramental table. 7 And in 
1784 at the Synod held at Philadelphia, the resolution of a 
previous Synod was confirmed, requiring of certain trans- 
gressors public acknowledgment before the congregation, 

(1) Hall. Nach. p. 855. (2) p. 284. (3) p. 185. 

(4) p. 907. (5) p. 1347. (6) p. 1346. (7) p. 962. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 33 

as the only condition of restoration to the privileges of 
church members. 1 How scriptural, therefore, was the gov- 
ernment, how spiritual, how faithful the discipline of our 
fathers ! Well may it be said, that those amongst us, who 
are most zealous and active in winning souls to Christ, ap- 
proximate nearest to the good old ways and example of our 
fathers. 

The second topic, to which we invite your attention, is the 
literary character and labors of the founders of our church 
in this country. Their literary character was indisputably 
of the first order. The greater part of them received a 
full university education at Halle. Muhlenberg, Hand- 
schuh, Heinzelman, Shultz, Bager, Voigt, Krug, Helmuth, 
and Schmidt and others were educated in different institu- 
tions. So fully was this fact felt by the literati of that day, 
that the honorary degree of Doctor of Divinity, a degree 
then very rarely conferred, was bestowed on a goodly num- 
ber of them, and their being appointed to professorships in 
different institutions and elected members of different learned 
societies, affords evidence of the same truth. 

Several of them preached both in English and German, 
and of Muhlenberg can be said what is applicable not to 
one in a hundred of the ablest and best ministers and mis- 
sionaries of our own age, that he statedly preached in three 
different languages on the same day, English, Holland and 
German. Overloaded as they were with missionary labor 
and pastoral care, these devoted men found little leisure for 
any other literary labor than was necessary for the worship 
and government of their churches. The Swedish Lutheran 
minister, provost Wrangle, in 1761, published an English 
version of Luther's catechism, which had also, as early as 
1642, been translated into the language of the neighboring 
Indians, by Campanius, likewise a Swede. Benjamin Frank- 
lin had an edition of the same work printed in German, and 
also issued proposals for publishing "Arndt's True Chris- 
tianity." In the year 1786 both the German hymn book 
and the "Kirchen Agende," or Directory for Worship, were 
published. Of the former, the editors were Drs. Muhlen- 
berg, Senr. Kunze, Helmuth and Muhlenberg, jr., of Lan- 
caster. The historical narrative of the establishment and 

(1) Hall. Nach. p. 1458. 



34 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

progress of the Lutheran church in this country, constitu- 
ting a quarto volume of 1518 pages, was contributed chiefly 
by Dr. Muhlenberg, sen., (whose valuable and pious contri- 
butions would form several 8vo volumes,) Brunnholtz, 
Handschuh, Kunze and Helmuth. Even literary labor may 
be expended amiss, when performed at the expense of more 
active and urgent care of souls. It therefore redounds to 
the credit of these men, that although so well qualified, 
they devoted comparatively little time to literary perform- 
ances. Yet did some of them, such as Dr.. Kunze, Dr. 
Helmuth, Dr. Muhlenberg of Lancaster, make valuable and 
learned contributions to the literature and science of our 
land; and Lutheran divines in this country generally, have 
by no means been deficient in the labors of their pen. 

But why did they fail to furnish the church with such lit- 
erary and theological institutions, as had always been the 
glory of the Lutheran church in Europe, and one of her 
most successful means of extension ? Not because they 
were insensible to their importance, or inattentive to their 
duty. Even in the earlier years of his ministry, Muhlen- 
berg advocated the necessity and importance of establish- 
ing a theological and literary institution to supply the church 
with well qualified laborers. As early as 1765, Dr. Frey- 
linghausen remarks : "Mr. Muhlenberg has often expressed 
his earnest desire, that the vast and increasing multitude of 
German Lutherans in North America might be better pro- 
vided for in regard to religious instruction. He is con- 
vinced, that the present arrangements are insufficient ; and 
that a Seminary ought to be established to train up laborers 
to publish the doctrines of the gospel. But, he adds, — 
and this teaches us the principal obstacle which baffled their 
efforts — hitherto the erection of houses of worship has 
caused such extensive expenditures, that the- greater part of 
our congregations are burdened with debt, and unable to 
contribute to such an enterprise." 1 

In 1 773 a commencement was actually made to establish 
such an institution, chiefly through the zeal and enterprize of 
Dr. Kunze, confessedly one of the most learned and enlight- 
ened divines of America, and an ornament to our church, to 
whom Dr. Miller, of Princeton, pays the following deserved. 

(1) Hall. NacL p. 1253-4.. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHE R AN I SM. 35 

tribute: "The various acquirements of this gentleman, and 
particularly his oriental learning, have long rendered him an 
ornament of the American republic of letters. He has prob- 
ably done more than any individual now living to promote 
a taste for Hebrew literature, among those intended for the 
clerical profession in, the United States. He is doubtless 
entitled to the character of a benefactor of the American 
churches." * That the efforts of such a man, seconded by 
the co-operation of Father Muhlenberg and others, failed of ] 
eventual success, would seem to compel us to the conclusion, 
that the fault lay not in them, but in the peculiar condition 
of our congregations at that day. Six years afterward, in 
1779, when the Academy in Philadelphia was erected into 
a University, a German professor of Latin, Greek and He- 
brew, was appointed, principally through the influence of 
Dr. Kunze, who was one of the Trustees. Dr. Kunze him- 
self was urged to accept the appointment, and in connection 
with Dr. Helmuth, labored with some success for the Ger- 
man portion of the community, but eventually this plan also 
was abandoned. In 1785 Messrs. Helmuth and Schmidt, 
then pastors in Philadelphia, commenced a private seminary, 
and for twenty years continued so far as their numerous 
pastoral duties would permit, to instruct candidates for the 
Lutheran ministry, among whom were many of the best pas- 
tors and divines of the middle era of our history ; but old 
age and eventually death also terminated these efforts. 

But in the providence of God the time seems to have 
arrived, when our churches are alike able and willing to ac- 
complish that which our fathers longed and prayed for, and 
wished to see, but died without the sight. It is one of the 
glories of the present era of our church, that she has been 
actively employed in laying the foundations and beginning to 
rear the walls of such theological and literary institutions 
as the Providence of God so signally blessed, in founding 
and extending the churches of the Reformation both in Eu- 
rope and America. We say beginning to rear the walls ; 
because though we have nominally four theological semi- 
naries in this country, they are not half endowed. None of 
them have funds enough to support half as many teachers 
as are necessary to give adequate instruction in the whole 

(1) Dr. Miller on the 18th centmy, vol. ii. p. 56. 



36 RETROSPECT OF LUTHER AN ISM. 

theological course. The entire time of three professors at 
least is requisite for this purpose ; and the best endowed of 
our seminaries has an addition to its buildings, little more 
than a support for one professor. Is it not evident then, that 
we owe it to the memory of our enlightened and zealous 
fathers, who laid the foundation of our church, that we 
should rear the superstructure ? When they of their 'poverty 
erected altars and temples to our God in this howling wilder- 
ness, ought not we of our abundance to finish the work they 
so nobly began, and make adequate provision for laborers 
to cultivate our vineyard, and to send forth others into the 
field of the world ? Will not that righteous Judge, who re- 
quires much from those to whom much is given, demand it 
at our hands ? But we cannot doubt from what we have 
seen and heard on the subject of our contemplated centen- 
ary, that your hearts will devise liberal things, and that 
your hands and those of our brethren throughout the. length 
and breadth of our church will, by the blessing of heaven, 
nobly execute them. 

The third and last topic to which we invite your attention, 
is the practical piety of our fathers, and their views of con- 
version and prayer meetings and revivals of -religion. Muh- 
lenberg and his early fellow laborers had been trained by 
the spirit of God as worthy disciples of the Frankean 
school. The period of their education was the age of re- 
vivals in Germany, and succeeded the era of the pietistic 
controversies, which grew out of them, and enlisted on one 
side or other, the entire theological intellect of that country. 
These laborers were selected by Franke the younger, and 
Freylinghausen, and were therefore men after their own 
heart, were chosen spirits of Germany. They were men 
not unworthy of the age in which their lot was cast, the age 
of Edwards, of Whitefield, of Wesley. Their own views 
were decidedly orthodox and evangelical, and .they were 
careful to require evidences of genuine piety from applicants 
for the ministerial office. When the venerable father who 
is yet in our midst was licensed in 1784, among the prin- 
cipal questions which he was required to answer, were the 
following : How do }^ou prove that Christ was not only a 
teacher, but also that he had made an atonement for the sins 
of men ? What is meant by. the influences and blessings of 
the Holy Spirit ? What are the evidences of conversion ? 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 37 

How do you prove the propriety of pedobaptism ? How do 
you prove the eternity of future punishment? Were the 
apostles infallible in their instructions ? Questions having a 
manifest bearing on the errors prevailing, or beginning to 
prevail in that age. Their preaching was most evangelical 
and edifying, and their journals show, that they earnestly 
prayed and looked for the divine blessing. Muhlenberg 
states, that he sometimes, after sermon, added a brief para- 
phrase or exhortation on the closing hymn, and described 
the case of a young man who attributed his conversion to 
this practice. Those devoted men were not desirous of 
merely pleasing their hearers. They were none of 

Those " gentle theologues of calmer kind, 
Whose constitution dictates to their pens, 
Who cold themselves, think ardor comes from hell,' 

On the contrary, all that they have written, and all that is 
on record of their sermons, proves, that they were anxious 
mainly for the glory of their Saviour and the salvation of 
the souls committed to their care. It was in this spirit that 
they plainly assailed the prevailing vices of the land, and 
often incurred the displeasure of the vicious. Thus, for his 
faithfulness towards Sabbath breakers, in Philadelphia, Dr. 
Kunze, in 1784, was attacked in the newspapers of the day. 
Soon after his settlement in New York, Dr. Kunze remarks : 
The souls that have been gained by the truth, are as yet few 
in number. Several individuals have come to me, and with 
tears besought me to teach them, what they must do to be 
saved." The reports which they statedly sent to Halle, 
abounded in individual narratives of conversions, and de- 
monstrate that they watched for souls as those that must 
give an account. 

They encouraged prayer-meetings among their church- 
members, and often conducted them themselves. Nor did 
they deem it necessary to forbid these meetings, although 
formalists within the church opposed them, and the ungodly 
world without sometimes disturbed the meetings, as was 
done at Lancaster in 1773, in the pastoral charge of Dr. 
Helmuth. Speaking of a revival of religion, then in pro- 
gress, he says : " Twice or thrice a week, meetings were held 
in the evening, at different places by the subjects of this 
4 



38 RETROSPECT OF LUTHE R AN ISM. 

work of grace, and the time spent in singing, in praying, 
reading a chapter of the word of God, or of Arndt's True 
Christianity, and if no prayer-meeting was held on Sabbath 
evening in the church, the substance of the sermon was dis- 
cussed. In some houses the number was rather large, there 
being sometimes as many as forty persons assembled at one 
place. The children of this world several times attempted 
to disturb their worship, by standing at the windows listen- 
ing, and by throwing against the doors. But by grace they 
were enabled to bear it without any resistance, and even 
when on their way home they were assailed on the streets 
with various nicknames, and stigmatized as hypocrites, piet- 
ists, &c, they answered not a word. Some of their perse- 
cutors also, when they heard these men sing and pray with 
so much fervor and sincerity, not only ceased their opposi- 
tion, but induced others to do the same." 1 The labors of 
the greater part of these men were extensively blessed. 
Speaking of a visit he paid to Tolpehocken, father Muhlen- 
berg says he found many souls who professed the Rev. Mr. 
N. Kurtz as their spiritual father.; -and his own labors were 
crowned with very extensive success. In 1782 there was 
also a season of revival, of special interest in the church in 
Philadelphia. " Particularly among the young (says Dr. 
Kunze) there has been a fire kindled which continued to 
burn to our great joy about a year." And numerous other 
similar scenes might be detailed if our time admitted. But 
we must close. 

Thus, my brethren, we have taken a hasty retrospect of 
our past history in this country, from the time when our 
fathers first pitched their tents in the howling wilderness, 
surrounded by ravenous wolves and panthers, and still more 
ferocious savages. The view is rich in lessons of various in- 
struction ; but our trespass on your time and attention, al- 
ready too long continued, forbids us to pursue them. What 
Christian, in reviewing- this history, does not feci, that the 
founders of our American church were men, whose char- 
acter and works deserve to live in the hearts of posterity. 
Who does not feel that instead of having outstripped their 
zeal and fidelity, we have too often fallen short of their 



(1) Hall. Nach', p. 1351-2. 



RETROSPECT OF LUTHERAN ISM. 39 

bright example ? Who is not compelled to admit that their 
memory has been too little cherished among us ? That in 
the language of our text we have too seldom "remembered 
the days of old, and considered the years of many genera- 
tions ?" That we have too seldom asked our fathers to tell 
us the story of God's dealings with them in the land of their 
pilgrimage ? Or what elder, what ruler, or pastor of the 
church among us, must not admit that he has too rarely 
from the sacred desk magnified the goodness of God to our 
fathers, and through them to us. 

The memory of the pilgrim fathers is cherished by our 
New England brethren, with an interest bordering on vener- 
ation. And yet we hesitate not to affirm, that in regard to 
piety and zeal, father Muhlenberg, and Brunnholtz, and 
Handschuh, and Bolzius, were by no means inferior to Cot- 
ton, Hooker, Davenport, or the Mathers ; and in learning 
they were their superiors. Let then the contemplated cen- 
tenary be improved as a favored season, to review the good- 
ness of God to us and his American Zion in general. Let 
us bless God, not that we are better than our fathers ; but 
that they were so good, so faithful, so rich in blessings, 
which have flowed down to us. Let us thank God, not that 
we are better than other portions of his kingdom in our land ; 
but that, in common with them, we have fallen heirs to. so 
rich a legacy of civil and political, and above all, of religi- 
ous liberty, bought by the joint blood of our fathers and 
theirs, bestowed by the kind Providence of their God and 
ours. 

Let us learn from the review, that if God so abundantly- 
blessed the labors of our fathers, amid such mountains of 
difficulty, he will not withhold the gracious influences of 
his Spirit from us ; but that whenever a Paul faithfully 
plants, and an /polios attentively waters, God will never 
withhold the increase. Let us therefore humbly and im- 
partially contemplate our defects as watchmen on Zion's 
walls, and by the grace of God, purpose their removal. Let 
us consider attentively the various defects in some of our 
churches, the low state of piety, the laxity of discipline, the 
worldliness and indifference ; and let us humble ourselves, 
and pray and labor for the coming of a brighter day. Let us 
take to heart the pecuniary difficulties, the imperfect means 
of instruction afforded by our imperfectly endowed institu 



40 RETROSPECT OF LUTHERANISM. 

tions, amid which our ministers must struggle into the min- 
istry ; and let us not rest until by the blessing of God, 
those difficulties are removed, until our church can boast of 
something like a Halle in the United States, until we can 
offer to our students advantages equal to those which the 
founders of our church enjoyed in the land of their fathers. 
Then will our church increase in efficiency and piety ; then 
will she be enabled to exert a more powerful and salutary 
influence on the future destinies of this great nation ; then 
will she be a more worthy coadjutor with the other churches 
of our Lord, in spreading the triumphs of the cross, in es- 
tablishing the universal reign of king Emanuel, in ushering 
in the day of millenial glory, when the kingdoms of this 
world shall have become the kingdoms of our Lord and hi^ 
Christ. 



II. DI3C0UKSE 



PORTRAITURE OF LTJTHEKANISM. 



And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, 
having great power ; and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he 
cried mightly with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, and 
is become the habitation of devils, (daimonon, deities, saints and idols,) and 
the hold of every fonl spirit, and a cage of every nnclean and hateful bird, 
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my peo- 
ple, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not her 
plagues. — Rev. rviii. 1-4. 

That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also 
may have fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is with the Father, 
and with his Son, Jesus Christ. — 1 John i. 3. 

If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not 
into your house, neither bid him God speed. — 2 John v. 10. 

The visible church of Christ is that external kingdom, 
which the Son of God established upon earth. It embraces 
those who make a credible profession of his religion, and is 
designed as a nursery to train souls for that kingdom in 
heaven, into which no unholy thing can enter. Though at 
present unhappii} 7 divided, it is substantially one universal 
body. It embraces not the members of any one denomina- 
tion alone, but all of every land, of every name, and of every 
complexion, who love the Lord Jesus Christ. The mem- 
bers of this body of Christ sustain certain mutual relations 
of fraternity ; and however in the providence of God, they 
have been permitted to adopt some diversities of external 
form, and to entertain, as did the primitive disciples them- 
selves, some minor differences of opinion, "they are bound 
4a 



42 PORTRAITURE OF LU THE R AN IS M. 

to exercise holy fellowship and communion," not only to- 
wards those of their own house and denomination, but "as 
God offereth opportunity, unto all those in every place, who 
call upon the name of the Lord Jesus," 1 and hold the car- 
dinal doctrines of our common Christianity. At the same 
time, if any come, preaching another gospel; we are pro- 
hibited from "receiving them into our house, or bidding* 
them God speed." Hence, wherever a church is estab- 
lished in a place where her doctrines are imperfectly known, 
it is due to surrounding Christians whose fellowship is in- 
vited, and to whom the hand of Christian fraternity is ten- 
dered, that such exposition be made of her views and pe- 
culiarities, as will enable others justly to appreciate her 
claims to recognition and regard. 

In this flourishing city a large proportion of the inhabit- 
ants have, from the beginning, either immediately or by de- 
scent, belonged to the great German family, and very many 
of them to its Lutheran branch. The larger part of these 
having by the current of business, of social relations and 
political institutions, been led into greater familiarity with 
the adopted language of our land, have, in the last thirty 
years united with the several English churches ; in which, 
we trust, they are doing and receiving good. Others, if 
we are rightly informed, who preferred to worship in the 
German language, erected a church about the year 1 300, in 
union with our German Reformed brethren, and made it a 
united German church for both denominations, which is 
still flourishing at this time. Within the last few years, two 
other churches, entirely Lutheran, have been built by the 
labors of the Rev. Mr. Heyer, the zealous missionary of 
our domestic missionary society, in conjunction with a little 
band of enterprising Lutheran laymen, one located in the 
city proper, and the other in Alleghany town. To-day we 
are assembled within the sacred walls of a third, an En- 
glish Lutheran church, erected by a portion of the same 
enterprising and zealous band, in conjunction with their be- 
loved pastor, the Rev. Mr. McCron. There having hereto 
fore been no edifice in this city, devoted to the worship oi 
God by Lutherans in the English language, the English 

(1) Westminster Confession, Art. xxvi. 2. See also Augsburg Confession- 
Art, vii. viiL 



PORTRAITURE OF L U TH E RA N I S M . 43 

community has remained comparatively unacquainted with 
the precise doctrines and forms of worship of- this eldest 
member of the Protestant family, of that church which, 
under God, was the first to obey the voice from heaven, 
and "come out from the Romish Babylon," and which, by 
the Divine blessing, has been extended over a wider field 
and larger population than any other in the entire Protest- 
ant world. In our own commonwealth, also, this church is 
decidedly the largest, though not in ministers, yet in the 
number of her churches and members. 1 Under these cir- 
cumstances it is deemed alike appropriate to the occasion 
and respectful to this promiscuous assembly, to step aside 
from the ordinary topics of pulpit discussion, and spend the 
hour in attempting to present 

A PORTRAITURE OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. 
We invite your attention 

I. To HER ORIGIN. 

II. Her primitive features. 

III. Her extension. And, 

IV. Her progressive development or improvement. 

The Lutheran church is indebted for her name, as is the 
Protestant ministry for the name preacher, 2 to the derision 
of .the Catholics. The distinguished papal theologian, Dr. 
Eckius, 3 the opponent of Luther and Carlstadt, in the cele- 

(1) The number of Lutheran churches in Pennsylvania is 328 ; the num- 
ber of communicants reported, 36 516; the number of ministers. Ill, of 
whom 64 belong to the synod of East Pennsylvania, 40 the synod of West 
Pennsylvania, and 7 bordering on the state of Ohio,- are connected with the 
synod of that State. 

(2) As preachiug bad been almost entirely neglected by the Romish 
priesthood; and their worship had degenerated iuto little else than a mere 
routine of ceremonies, the fact that Lutheran ministers made the preaching 
of God's word a prominent part of their public services, naturally arrested 
attention, and the Romanists stigmatized them as mere proclaimers, '-'prEedi- 
cantes " or "prediger" (Dutch preeken, French precher. English " preach.") 
"preachers," a term of far less dignity and significance in their eyes than 
that of priest. 

(3) Dr. Vater, in his Continuation of Hehke's Church History, vol. ix. 
p. 205. attributes part of the credit of this name to Pope Adrian, as also to 
the anti-Melanchthonians. 



44 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAN ISM. 

brated disputation at Leipsic, in the year 1819, wishing to 
show his contempt for Luther and his cause, and not dream- 
ing whereunto this matter of the reformation would grow, 
first stigmatized 1 the friends of the reformer as Lutherans^ 
with the same feelings with which we speak of the Owen- 
ites and Fanny Wright men of our day. The term being 
regarded as a happy conceit, was soon spread among the 
enemies of the cause ; and its friends, though opposed to 
it in principle, responded to the name, because they were 
not ashamed of their leader. But the name officially adopted 
by the Lutheran reformers was that of the evangelical church, 
that is, the gospel church, in antithesis to the legal ritual of the 
Old Testament, the very name recently adopted by the 
united Lutheran and Reformed church in Prussia. Luther 
himself, like the great apostle of the Gentiles, protested 
most decidedly against the use of his name as the Shib- 
bolet of a sect, and it is to be regretted that his advice was 
disregarded. 

The Lutheran church in this country has, in common with 
that of our German Reformed brethren, also been distinct- 
ively termed the German church. This designation must 
not be understood as implying the limitation of the wor^;.'^ 
of either of these churches to the German language. It is 
known to the intelligent hearer, that in different countries, 
the services of the Lutheran church are conducted in the 
Swedish, the Norwegian, the Danish, the Icelandic, the 
Russian and the French, as well as in the English and Ger- 
man languages. Yet it is true, that as Germany was the 
cradle of the reformation, she was also the primitive seat of 
that church, which grew out of the reformation in the land 
of Luther. Germany is still the most extensive seat of 
Lutheranism, as sbe also is the land of our fathers. No 
other foreign country is therefore fraught with such inter- 

(1) Koecher's Vertheidigung, &c., p. 66, 68. Thus George, the Mar- 
grave of Brandenburg, when reproached for being a Lutheran, indignantly 
and nobly replied: "I was not baptized in the name of Luther, he is not 
my God and Savior, I do not believe in him, and am not saved by him; 
and therefore, in tbis sense I am no Lutheran. But if I be asked, whether 
with my heart and lips I profess the doctrines which God restored to light 
through the instrumentality of his blessed servant, Dr. Luther, I neither 
hesitate nor am ashamed to call myself a Lutheran. In this sense lam, 
and as long as I live, will remain a.. Lutheran." 



PORTRAITURE OF LFTHERANISM. 45 

esting and hallowed associations to the great mass of Amer- 
ican Lutherans as Germany, the mother of the reformation, 
the cradle of Lutheranism, the land where our fathers pro- 
claimed the gospel of salvation, where Spener sowed the 
seed of truth, where Arndt preached and wrote and lived 
his "True Christianity," where Franke wrought his works 
of love, and where believing Luther poured his prayer of 
faith into the lap of God ! But it is not only to Lutheran 
minds that Germany is encircled with interesting associa- 
tions. Although the populace are too little acquainted with 
the fact, yet what intelligent scholar does not know that the 
Germans constitute one of the most distinguished branches 
of the human family, and that at different'periods through- 
out the two thousand years of their national history, 
they have excelled in all that is truly noble and praise- 
worthy in heathen virtue, or interesting in the fruits of 
an enlightened and active Christian piety ? Germany was 
originally inhabited by a heroic and martial people, whose 
origin is enveloped in some obscurity. Their language and 
religion point us to Asia. They certainly proceeded from 
the north of the Euxine sea, and known as Scythians, Teu- 
tones, Franks, &c, overspread all Y/estern Europe. The 
English are both as to language and population, in part de- 
scended from two of these German tribes, the Anglos and the 
Saxons, who at an early day conquered Britain, and formed 
the Anglo-Saxon race, whose lineage is often boasted of by 
a portion of our citizens. When first visited by the Ro- 
mans about the time of our Saviour, the Germans had al- 
ready for ages inhabited the country, and had lost all traces 
of their earliest history. Divided into many independent 
tribes, and often engaged in intestine wars, each tribe ac- 
knowledged no laws but those enacted by the majority at a 
general council. Far removed from the refinement and lite- 
rary character of the Romans, they were alike free from their 
licentiousness and effeminacy. Hospitality and conjugal 
fidelity were prominent characteristics of the Germans ; and 
a promise given to friend or foe, they held inviolable, even at 
the risk of life. They cherished a firm belief of the immor- 
tality of the soul, and of future retributions. They were in- 
deed polytheists, but their religion was of the sublimer cast. 
They neither bowed down to idols, nor worshipped in tem- 
ples made with hands, but offered their devotions in open 



46 PORTRAITURE OF LUTH E R ANISM . 

groves, under the broad canopy of heaven; for, says the 
Roman historian, they regarded their gods as too sacred 
and great to be confined in temples, or represented by 
idols of wood or stone. 1 

Of the different tribes of this numerous family which 
overspread all western Europe, those only retain the name 
of Germans, in modern history, who reside in the territory 
denominated Germany. Their martial spirit rendered diffi- 
cult the introduction of Christianity among them, which was 
however effected at least in name successively among the 
different tribes, from the third to the eighth century. The. 
forgiving spirit of the gospel gained a tardy victory over 
their warlike minds; as was strikingly illustrated in the in- 
stance of Ciovis, 2 king of the Franks, a tribe that settled iii 
Gaul. On one occasion, whilst Remigius was preaching to 
them and depicting in glowing colors the sufferings of the 
Saviour when suspended on the cross, the king, no longer 
able to restrain his spirit, cried out in the midst of the con- 
gregation : "Ah, if I had been there with my Franks, the 
Jews should not have crucified the Lord !" Unhappily the 
Christianity first introduced among them was strongly tinc- 
tured with the corruptions of Rome, and in the progress of 
ages, the Germans participated extensively in the increasing 
superstitions and degeneracy which reigned at the fountain 
head. But in the providence of God it was reserved for 
this heroic and undaunted people, to take the lead in break- 
ing the bonds by which Europe had for ages been held in 
subjection. "Whilst," says the distinguished Lutheran his- 
torian, Dr. Mosheim, " the Roman pontiff slumbered iii se- 
curity at the head of the church, and saw nothing through- 
out the vast extent of his dominion but tranquility and 
submission, and while the worthy and pious professors of 
genuine Christianity almost despaired of seeing that reforma- 
tion on which their ardent desires and expectations were 
bent ; an obscure and inconsiderable person arose, on a 
sudden, in the year 1517, and laid the foundation of this 
long-expected change, by opposing with undaunted resolu- 
tion his single force to the torrent of Papal ambition and des- 
potism. This remarkable man was Martin Luther, of Eisle- 

(1) See Sckf beck's Allgenieine, WeltgescMchte, vol. iii, p. 68. 

(2) Ciovis belonged to the German, Salian tribe. Henke, vol. i, p. 387, 



PORTRAITURE OF LXTTHEE AKIS M. 47 

ben, in Saxony, 1 an Augustinian monk, and professor of the- 
ology in the university which had been erected at Wittenberg 
a few years before." It was this interesting people, after they 
had thrown off the yoke of Rome, and through the instru- 
mentality of their countryman, Luther, and others, received 
the pure and unadulterated word of God, that constituted 
themselves a reformed, an evangelical church, which has 
been denominated Lutheran. And it is from this interest- 
ing nation and this church, that the German portion of 
the Lutherans in this country are descended. 

The incidents of this interesting revolution, which affected 
both church and state throughout Europe, we cannot stop 
even to glance at. It was a revolution not merely of out- 
ward forms, but of the elementary principles, which bad for 
ages been the basis of all institutions, both civil and eecle- 
. siastical. Suffice it to say, that by his ninety-five theses, 
by his various disputations, by his noble translation of the 
bible into German, (a work to which even Schiller, confes- 
sedly one of the greatest masters of the German language, 
has professed himself much indebted,) by his laborious 
preaching and teaching, and by his very numerous publica- 
tions, which Seckendorf enumerates at several hundreds ; 
Luther and his Spartan band of co-workers, Melancthon, 
Zwingle, Calvin, and others, accomplished the greatest and 
most salutary revolution which Europe has witnessed since 
the commencement of the Christian era ; a revolution, also, 
to which, in the providence of God, these United States 
may clearly trace their liberties. 

Without originally designing a separation from Home, the 
increasing light which burst in upon his mind, as well as the 
inflexible opposition of the Papal court to all reform, taught 
him the necessity of entire separation from that degenerate 
hierarchy which had corrupted the waters of life, and re- 
fused to have them purified by the salt of the gospel. 

The question here arises, was the Romish establishment 
still a Christian church, or was she antichrist ? And was 
the ordination valid which Luther obtained in her ? Though 
lamentably corrupt, we must still regard her as at that 
time a part of the true church of Christ, because some of 
the grossest corruptions which prevailed in a part of the 



(1) Mosheim, vol. iv, p. 25. 



48 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

Romish church were not general, and having not yet 
been received into the official standards of papacy, could 
not be charged on her as a whole, and did not form a nec- 
essary part of her system. Such corruptions are the denial 
of the cup to the laity, canonization of the vulgate version 
of the scriptures, the elevation of tradition to an equality 
with the word of God, &c. But when the Council of Trent, 
about twelve years after the publication of the Augsburg 
Confession, (1542,) enacted these abuses into integral and 
essential parts of Romish faith, and required them of all 
who desired to be members of the Romish church, the marks 
of antichrist were indelibly impressed upon her, and she 
lost her claim as a church to Christian recognition. Her 
ordination of Luther, therefore, in 1507, 1 was valid, and as 
he renounced her jurisdiction on Dec. 10, 1520, by comit- 
ting the papal bull of citation to the flames, her subsequent 
excommunication did not reach him, and he stands as a se- 
ceder from her communion. 2 Or, if we date the origin of the 
Lutheran church from 1530, and suppose Luther to have re- 
mained under Romish jurisdiction till then, when the Augs- 
burg Confession was published, the ordination of Luther 
and his associates still remains untouched ; for the papal 
bull of excomunication in 1 520, being wholly unrighteous 
and contrary to the word of God, could no more deprive 
them of their ministerial character, than the decision of 
the Jewish Sanhedrim against the apostles, commanding 
them to speak no more in the name of the Lord Jesus ; or 
the excommunication of the orthodox ministry by the Arians, 
when they gained a temporary ascendancy in the fourth 
century, could divest them of their clerical character. The 
Lutheran and the protestant ministry generally, is therefore 
as valid as was that of Rome at the time of the reformation, 
even if we admitted the necessity of a lineal, personal suc- 
cession from the apostles. 

As to the doctrine of papal apostolic succession, it is a 



(1) Luther was ordained on the fourth Sunday after Easter, called, in the 
old calenders, Sunday Cantate. 

(2) The bull of citation to repentance and retraction within sixty days, was 
published June 15, 1520 ; and the final bill of excommunication January 
3rd, 1521 , twenty -five days after he publicly renounced .Romanism by burn- 
ing the former bull. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHE R AN I SM. 49 

mere figment, and can never be proved by the Papists 
themselves. To say nothing of their doctrine of intention, 
which cardinal Bellarmine himself asserts, 1 renders doubt- 
ful the validity of every Romish sacrament ; where was their 
papal succession when Liberius, the occupant of the holy 
see, professed Arianism, A. D. 357 ? Where was it in the 
fourteenth century, during the so-called great western 
schism, from A. D. 1378 to 1414, when two different lines 
of contending pontiffs reigned simultaneously, each having 
a portion of the church adhering to him, each excommuni- 
cating the other, and finally both deposed as heretical and 
perjured by the Council of Pisa in 1409 ? 2 

We admit, indeed, that the existing ministry of the 
church are ordinarily the proper agents to induct others in- 
to the sacred office, and thus the propriety of regular min- 
isterial succession arises. But it is conceded by all, that 
such succession is found in all the Protestant churches, and 
therefore their ministry is valid. But the necessity of even 
this succession or appointment, in some extraordinary cases, 
it would be difficult to establish. As we learn from our 
text, the scripture commands us to test those who come un- 
to us by their doctrines, before we "bid them God speed,'* 
but does it say any thing about their apostolic succession ? 
Accordingly, Luther, and many distinguished Lutheran 
divines, maintain, in accordance with our brethren of the 
Congregational church, that whenever necessity requires 
it, the congregation of believers have the power to elect 
and constitute one of their number as pastor. 3 

Having thus glanced at the origin of the Lutheran church, 
we proceed to inquire, 

I. What were her primitive features ? 

The first feature embraces the fundamental principle 
adopted by the church. 

" The great and leading principle of the Lutheran church," 
says Dr. Mosheim, 4 " is that the holy scriptures are the only 
source, whence we are to draw our religious sentiments, 

(1) Bellarm. Lib. Just. cap. 8. Sacramentum non conficiatur sine in- 
tentione ministri, et intentionem alterius nemo videre possit. See Wad- 
dell's Letters to editor of Catholic Miscellany, p. 13; New York, 1830. 

(2) See Appendix, note A. (3) See Appendix, note G. 
(4) Vol. in, p. 208 of his Eccles. Hist. 

5 



50 PORTRAITURE OF L UT HE R AN I SM. 

whether they relate to faith or practice ; and that these in- 
spired writings are, in all matters that are essential to salva- 
tion, so plain, and so easy to be thoroughly understood, that 
their signification may be learned, without the aid of an expos- 
itor, by every person of common sense, who has a competent 
knowledge of the language in which they are composed. 
There are indeed certain formularies adopted by this church, 
which contain the principal points of its doctrine, ranged for 
the sake of method and perspicuity, in their natural order. 
But these books have no authority but what they derive 
from the scriptures of truth, whose sense and meaning they 
are designed to convey." This was the noble principle 
adopted by the Lutheran church, a principle which has the 
cordial assent of every Lutheran in the present da}^, and in re- 
gard to which our only regret is, that though it was adopted in 
theory by all the Protestant churches, not one of them had yet 
light and grace and charity enough consistently to practice it. 

The principal books here referred to as subsidiary to the 
bible, were of two classes : first, the confessions of the prim- 
itive centuries, the so-called Apostles' Creed, the Nicene 
Creed, and the Athanasian Confession, by which the Luth- 
eran church established her identity with the church of the 
apostolic and succeeding ages ; and, secondly, the Augsburg 
Confession, composed by Melancthon, and presented before 
the Emperor Charles V., at the diet in 1530; the Apology 
or Defense of this Confession by the same hand ; the Smal- 
cald Articles by Luther, and also his Catechisms. 

The prominent doctrines taught in these books, may be 
regarded as the second feature. They are none other than 
those commonly termed the doctrines of the Reformation, the 
doctrines which, with few variations, are held in common by 
all the so-called orthodox churches. They are among others 
the following : 

First. The doctrine of the trinity of persons in one God- 
head ; or to use the language of the Augsburg Confession, 
" That there is one divine essence which is called and is God, 
eternal, incorporeal, indivisible, infinite in power, wisdom 
and goodness — and yet that there are three persons, w T ho are 
of the same essence and power and are co-eternal, the Father, 
the Son, and the Holy Spirit." 1 

(1) Art. i. p. 44 of Popular Theology. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 51 

Secondly. These books also teach the proper and eternal 
divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ in all its amplitude. Their 
language is : That the Word, that is, the Son of God* as- 
sumed human nature, in the womb of the blessed virgin 
Mary, so that the two natures, human and divine, inseparably 
united into one person, constitute one Christ, who is true 
God and man." 1 

Thirdly. The universal depravity of our race. Their lan- 
guage is : "Since the fall of Adam, all men who are natural- 
ly engendered, are born with a depraved nature, that is, 
without the fear of God, or confidence towards him, but with 
sinful propensities." 2 

Fourthly. On the Atonement they teach its vicarious nature 
and unlimited extent. Says the Augsburg Confession : "The 
Son of God, truly suffered, was crucified, died, and . was 
buried, that he might reconcile the Father to us, and be a 
sacrifice not only for original sin, but also for all the actual 
sins of men." He also sanctifies "those who believe in him, 
by sending into their hearts the Holy Spirit, who governs, 
consoles, quickens and defends them against the devil and 
the power of sin." 3 

Fifthly. On Justification they teach, "That men cannot 
be justified before God by their own strength, merits or 
works ; but that they are justified gratuitously, for Christ's 
sake, through faith." 4 

Sixthly. Concerning a Holy Life, or Good Works, they 
teach, "That this faith must bring forth good fruits; and 
that it is our duty to perform those good works which God 
has commanded, because he has enjoined them, and not in 
the expectation of thereby meriting justification before him." 5 

Seventhly. Concerning The Ministerial Office and the Means 
of Grace, the Augsburg Confession declares : "In order that 
we may obtain this faith, the ministerial office has been 
instituted, whose members are to preach the gospel and ad- 
minister the sacraments," (namely, baptism and the Lord's 
supper.) " For through the instrumentality of the word and 
sacraments, as means of grace, the Holy Spirit is given, 

(1) Art. iii. p. 130 

(2) Art. ii. p. 123. 

(3) Aug. Confession, Art. iii. p. 131. 

(4) Art. iv. p. 131. 

(5) Aug. Confession, Art. vi. p. 165. 



5g PORTRAITURE OF, LUTHERAN ISM. 

who in his own time and place, produces faith in those who 
hear the gospel message, namely, that God, for Christ's 
sake, and not on account of any merit in us, justifies those 
who believe in Christ." 1 

And, finally, of the Future Judgment, and icorld of retribu- 
tion, the same Confession teaches, 2 that at the end of the 
world, Christ will appear for judgment ;, that he will raise 
all the dead ; that he will give to the pious and elect eternal 
life and endless joys : but will condemn wicked men and 
devils to be punished without end/' Such are the prom- 
inent doctrines avowed by the Lutheran church in the 
beginning, all of which are at this day received by the 
entire Lutheran church in this country. 

The third feature is her government. " The Govern- 
ment of the Lutheran church," (in Europe,) says Dr. 
Mosheim ;" 3 seems equally removed trom episcopacy on the 
one hand and from Presbyterianism on the other, if we 
except the kingdoms of Sweden and Denmark, which retain 
the. form of ecclesiastical government that preceded the Re- 
formation, purged indeed from the superstitions and abuses 
that rendered it so odious. 4 The Lutherans are persuaded 
that there is no law of divine authority which points out a 
distinction between the ministers of the gospel with respect 
to rank, dignity or prerogatives : and therefore they recede 
from episcopacy" 5 On the other hand, the early reformers 
having been trained under the aristocratic governments of 
Europe, and accustomed to the imparity of Romanism, re- 
garded some diversity in the authority, rank and duties of 
ministers as conducive to order and harmony. Hence, with 
the universal acknowledgment of the parity of ministers by 
divine right, they introduced some subordination on the 

(1) Art. v. p. 148. 

(2) Aug;. Confession, Art. xvii. p. 288 

(3) Eccl. History, vol. iii. p. 211, 212. 

(4) On this subject. Dr. Maclaine, the distinguished translator of Mos- 
heim 's History, uses this language : " The archbishop of Upsal is primate of 
Sweden, and the only archbishop among the Lutherans. The luxury and 
licentiousness that too commonly flow from the opulence of the Roman 
Catholic clergy, are unknown in these two northern states ; since the 
revenues of the prelate now mentioned, do not amount to more than four 
hundred pounds yearly, while those of the bishops are proportionabl) 
small." Vol. iii. p. 211. 

(5) Mosheim's Eccl. History, vol. iii. p. 212. 



PORTRAITURE F LUT HE R ANI S M. 53 

ground of human expediency, and designated those to 
whom the supervision of certain districts was confided, 
superintendents, consistorial counsellors, inspectors, &c. In 
the United States entire parity is maintained, and even the 
nominal office of Senior Ministerii, is retained by only one 
out of all our synods. And as Dr. Henke very justly 
remarks, the assertion, that Sweden and Denmark retained 
the office of bishop, can be made only by special latitude 
of speech, by using the term bishop for an office divested 
of the mystic idea of higher or holier dignity, sometimes 
attached to the name. 1 Even in what was then the dutchy 
of Prussia, two of these officers were still termed bishops, 
fifty years after the Reformation, namely, the Pomesanisch 
and the Samlcendisch bishops. 2 And Frederick William, 
the late king of Prussia, amid other arbitrary acts of inter- 
ference with ecclesiastical matters, again conferred the title 
of diocesan bishop on several favorites, much to the dis- 
pleasure of the great mass of German divines. In this 
country, although our ministers are strenuous advocates of 
parity, they pretty extensively favor the idea of returning 
to the use of the word bishop in its scriptural sense, in which, 
according to the concession of many of the most distinguish- 
ed advocates of inparity, it was synonymous with elder, or 
preacher, and is applicable to every minister of the gospel ; 
the sense in which as Luke informs us, instead of one bishop 
having oversight over a large district of country or diocese, 
there were several bishops in the one city Ephesus." 3 

In Europe, where the unhappy union between church and 
state, established by the emperor Constantine in the fourth 
century, still continues, the civil rulers exercise more or less 
influence in all the churches. But in this country, the Luth 
eran church in common with her Protestant sister churches, 
deprecates as unwarranted and dangerous all interference 
of civil government in religious affairs ; excepting the mere 
protection of all denominations and all individuals in the 
unrestricted right to worship in any and every way they 
think proper. 

(1) Hencke's Kirchengesehichte, B. iii. s. 303. 

(2) Henke, iii. p. 364. 

(3) Acts. xx. 28. To the elders, i. e. ministers of Ephesus, Paul say? : 
"Take heed of the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you over- 
seers," or as the Greek is, bishops. 

5a 



54 PORTRAITURE OF L UTHE RANIS M. 

The fourth feature of Lutheranism, is found in feer 
Liturgies and. festivals. In all the different countries of Eu- 
rope and in America, our churches have liturgies, differing 
in minor points, but agreeing in essentials. These are used 
more or less in public worship, and serve as a directory in 
the performance of the different ministerial functions. These 

liturgies are about one-third as long as those of the Protest- 

© © 

ant Episcopal church ; and, as to character and contents, 
very similar to them. In the United States, we have adopted 
a short liturgy, which it is left optional with each minister to 
use as often or as seldom as he may judge most conducive 
to edification. In regard to such forms our own impression 
is, that when properly constructed, they tend to give fixed- 
ness, tangibility and definiteness to christian worship in the 
popular mind ; but they should be short, lest when frequent- 
ly repeated, they tire ; nor should they be exclusively used, 
lest they degenerate into mere instruments of formality. 

As to ecclesiastical festivals, of human appointment, those 
only are observed which were instituted to commemorate 
the fundamental facts of the christian religion, such as the 
nativity, death, resurrection and ascension of the Son of 
God, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of 
Pentecost. As Christianity is a religion based upon these 
facts ; it is important that the recollection of them, in their 
literal, historical import, be cherished by her professors. 
And as ministers rarely preach once a year on each of 
these topics, unless called on by some such custom ; we re- 
gard the influence of these festivals as salutary in their 
appropriate design ; and the abuses which are practiced on 
them in some places by the irreligious, are not necessary 
consequences of them, and should be obviated. 

But this portraiture of Lutheranism would be incomplete, 
were we to omit the fifth feature, her particular attention 
to the religious instruction of the children of the church, and 
habit of calling on them, when they attain years of discre- 
tion, personally to confirm and assume the vows made for 
them at their baptism. The Lutheran church, believing 
that God has not revoked in the ISTew Testament, the insti- 
tution of infant membership in his church, which he estab- 
lished in the Old, receives into her bosom both the actual 
and adopted children of professed believers, by the initiatory 
rite of baptism, according to the Saviour's command. Hav- 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAN1SM. 55 

ing thus received them, she treats them accordingly. From 
the days of the Reformation the Lutheran church inculcated 
it as a principal duty of her ministers and members to 
provide for the adequate instruction of the children of the 
church in the doctrines of our holy religion. In this 
country, where in most cases, each minister has charge of 
three or four churches, his personal instructions cannot well 
reach all the children with sufficient frequency ; yet it is 
regarded as the duty of every minister, occasionally to 
convene the children of each consreo-ation for instruction 
in the catechism : and that minister will prove most success- 
ful, and best deserve the confidence of his charge, who, by 
the establishment of a Sabbath School in every congregation, 
and the employment of the pious members of his charge, 
brings the lambs of, his flock, and all others who are with- 
1 out a shepherd, and are appropriately within' the sphere of 
his labors, under full and stated influence of the doctrines 
and precepts of the gospel. Annually also, and if necessary 
oftener, the minister holds a series of meetings with those 
who are applicants for admission to sacramental communion, 
or as in reference to the infant baptism of the applicant, it 
is called, confirmation. To these meetings are invited all 
who feel a concern for their salvation, and especially all 
those subjects of infant baptism, who have attained years 
of discretion. "Every meeting is opened by singing and 
prayer, and closed by. an address to the throne of grace. 
The time of the first meeting, is chiefly occupied by the 
pastor in explaining the object of the contemplated course 
of instruction in as solemn and impressive a manner as 
possible. This object he states to be, not merely the ac- 
quisition of doctrinal knowledge — nor merely the admission 
to the Lord's table ; for Paul tells us, that many eat and 
drink judgment to themselves. But says the zealous pas- 
tor who feels the eternal importance of this solemn occa- 
sion, the object is to show you in so plain and simple a 
manner, that you cannot fail to understand it, the natural 
depravity of your hearts, your habitual and base rebellion 
against your best benefactor, your father and your God, 
and your danger of being shut out forever from his blissful 
presence ; to show" you that you must be born again, or be 
eternally excluded from the kingdom of heaven, and to give 
you such instructions and directions from day to day, as will 



56 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

if faithfully pursued, sooner or later, certainly eventuate in 
your conversion to God. 1 Every succeeding meeting is 
occupied in conversational lectures on experimental religion, 
and in the examination of the catechumen on the funda- 
mental doctrines and duties of religion as contained in the 
bible and Luther's Catechism. These meetings afford to 
the faithful pastor better opportunities of access to the 
hearts of the rising generation in his church, than are en- 
joyed by any denomination who neglect this practice. At 
the close of these meetings, which are continued through 
from six to twelve weeks once or twice each week, and in 
the last if convenient daily, the church council are convened 
to examine the catechumens on their qualifications for 
sacramental communion. It is here that our practice is 
sometimes less rigid than it ought to be. The council 
should faithfully examine every applicant, and admit none 
but such as give evidence of living faith in that Redeemer, 
whose dying love they wish to commemorate. Although in 
the hands of an unconverted minister this duty, like all 
others, will be mere formality, and attended with little 
profit ; yet we have never met, nor do we expect to meet a 
pious minister, who faithfully practised this system, and did 
not regard it as a most blessed and successful method of 
bringing souls to Christ. After an experience and observa- 
tion of thirty years in the ministry, we cannot but regard 
this practice faithfully pursued, as one of the glories of the 
Lutheran church. 

Having occupied much time in delineating the primitive 
features of the Lutheran church, a few words must suffice on 
the subject of 

III. Her extension. 

After her establishment in Germany by the labors of 
Luther, Melancthon and others, about 1525, when the 
Elector John, of Saxony, first publicly adopted the amended 
system, the Lutheran doctrines were introduced into Siveden, 
by the instrumentality of Olaus Petri in 1527, under the 
sanction of king Gustavus Yasa Ericson. 2 Into Denmark 
the Lutheran doctrines were fully introduced in 1527, in the 

(1) Popular Theology, p. 230, 231, ed. 2, 

(2) See Appendix, note B„ 



PORTRAITURE OF L UTHE R AN ISM. 57 

reign of Frederick, after some preparatory steps by Christiern 
II. The Lutheran church is also established in Norway, in 
Lapland, Finland, and Iceland ; and has some congregations 
in Hungary, France and Asia. 

In Russia the Lutheran population amounts to 2,600,000 
with 500 ministers. 1 In the United States, the first Lutheran 
churches were established by the Swedes, who emigrated to 
this country and settled on the banks of the Delaware during 
the reign of queen Christina, and under the sanction of her 
prime minister, Oxenstiern, about the year 1636, sixteen or 
seventeen years after the settlement of New England by the 
pilgrim fathers, and about thirty years after the establish- 
ment of an English colony in Virginia. As these churches 
were few in number, and received no accessions from the 
mother country, the Swedish language was soon lost by the 
■ rising generation, and preaching in the English tongue was 
necessary long before any of our German pastors officiated 
in that language. Under these circumstances recourse was 
had to our Episcopal brethren for English ministrations, and 
thus these churches gradually became connected with that 
denomination ; though by their charter they are still styled 
Swedish Lutheran churches. 2 

The next Lutheran establishment was by Lutherans from 
Holland, who erected a Lutheran church in the city of New 
York in 1703, in which worship was conducted in the Hol- 
land, the English, and afterwards also in the German 
tongue. 3 

The first German Lutheran churches in this country, were 
regularly organized by Rev. Messrs. Bolzius and Gronau, 
in 1733; and in 1742, hj Henry Mel chior Muhlenberg, one 
of the patriarchs of American Lutheranism. This indefati- 
gable and talented servant of Christ, whilst located in the 
city of New York, was in the habit of preaching in the 
German, the Holland, and the English languages, every 
Lord's day. Had his successors followed his noble exam- 
ple, and qualified themselves to preach in the English lan- 

(1) See Reinwald's Repertoriurn. 

(2) Annals of the Swedes on the Delaware, by Rev. J. C. Clay, p. 3, 4, 
161, &c. Also Schubert's Schwedische Kirchenverfassung, vol. ii. p. 439 
-442. 

(3) See "Authentic Account of a Bill in Chancery," New York, p. 4, 
&c. 



58 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER ANISM. 

guage wherever it was necessary, the Lutheran church 
would at this day be twice as numerous in this country as 
it is. 

We have, at present, (1840,) about 350 ministers and 
1000 churches; 1 and amid the long catalogue of distin- 
guished divines, who have since wielded the interests and 
advanced the cause of our Zion, and have entered on their 
celestial inheritance, what friend of the church does not 
delight to name a Kunze, a Schmidt, a Kurtz, another 
Muhlenberg, a Goring, a Helmuth, a Melsheimer, a Storch, 
an Endress, a Lochman, a Schaeffer, a RuthraufY, a Sho- 
ber, a Geissenhainer ? 

The entire Lutheran population in the world is estimated 
by accurate authors at from 25 to 30,000,000. 

In literary and theological institutions, in learned theolo- 
gians, and in a rich and learned theological literature, 2 the 
Lutheran church has confessedly surpassed all others. 
Gratitude for the numerous and signal advantages, reaped 
by the cause of reformation from the superior learning of 
her advocates, and the obvious facilities rendered by the 
revival of letters previously to the reformation, taught the 
Protestant princes to regard learning as a special gift of 
God, to deliver them from the bondage of the dark ages. 
Numerous literary institutions were therefore founded at an 
early day, and others enlarged. Among the former are 
the universities of Jena (1558,) and Konigsberg ; among 
the latter Wittenberg and Leipsic. At this day there are 
in Germany nine universities, wholly Lutheran, 3 one 4 be- 
longing jointly to the Lutherans and Reformed, and four 8 
to the Lutherans, Reformed and Catholics in conjunction. 
In Sweden there are two Lutheran universities, and in Nor- 
way one. By the attention of the Protestants to learning 
and learned institutions, enlightened advocates for the truth 
were provided, and a pious, learned literature was formed 



(1) Now, (in 1851,) this number is 771 ministers, and about 1650 con- 
gregations. Of the ministers, nearly one-half are natives of Germany, lo- 
cated principally in the Mississippi Valley. 

(2) See Appendix, note C. 

(3) Leipsic, Rostock, Greifswalde, Jena, Giessen, Kiel, Halle, Gottingen, 
and Erlangen universities. 

(4) At Berlin. 

(5) Heidelberg, Tubingen, Breslau and. Bonn. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHE RANI S M. 59 

at an early day, to spread its purifying and enlightening 
influence over Europe and the civilized world. Had Lu- 
ther, Melancthon, Calvin and Zwingle not been men of 
distinguished learning, they could never have drawn from 
the stores of sacred and patristic literature, the facts which 
subverted the corrupt pretensions of the papists, and erected 
a fabric of truth, which remains to this day the admiration 
of the world. How incalculably would not the Lutheran 
church in this country have gained in efficiency, in exten- 
sion, in respectability, in usefulness, had our fathers a cen- 
tury, or even fifty years ago, laid the foundation of some of 
the institutions which have since then been established? 
Now the Lutheran church in this country has four theolop;- 
ical seminaries in operation, and at least partially endowed, 
and one college 1 under its particular patronage. Li the 
seminary at Gettysburg alone, upwards of one hundred. 2 
ministers have been trained in fifteen years, who are now 
preaching to thousands, the unsearchable riches of Christ, 
and a large number have proceeded from our other schools 
of the prophets at Hart wick, at Lexington and at Columbus. 
Let these institutions therefore share our warmest prayers, 
and our most zealous efforts ; and let no Lutheran rest sat- 
isfied, until they are all adequately endowed, 
We proceed to contemplate 

TV. The progressive development or improvement of 
the Lutheran church. 

Luther had wisely regarded the reformation as unfinished, 
and exhorted his followers to turn away from his works, and 
study the bible more attentively. 3 Unfortunately for the 
cause of truth and peace, the admiration of many of his 
followers, degenerated into excessive veneration ; and death, 
which translated him to the abode of peace in heaven, made 
his writings, the source of rancorous contention on earth, 
imparted a kind of canonical authority to them. Moreover, 



(1) The number of Theological Seminaries is now increased to six, and 
that of the colleges to three., by the erection of institutions at Springfield, 
Ohio, Hillsborough, Illinois, and Columbus, Ohio. 

(2) This number has increased to 250. 

(3) " I have not kept a list of my publications, nor have I all the works 
themselves; for I desire much rather that the Bible alone should be studied 
instead of my works." — Letter to Ursinus, 1527; Thl. 21. p. 1031. 



60 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER AN ISM. 

as the church, established by his instrumentality, was desig- 
nated by his name, his works gradually were regarded as 
the standards of orthodoxy, and all attempts to continue the 
work of reformation so gloriously commenced by him, were 
denounced as treason to his cause ! ! " Even, during his 
lifetime," says the distinguished historian Henke, "there 
were some who followed him with a slavish servility. A 
species of canonization of this great man had already taken 
place ; and he was not unfrequently known by the names, 
niegalander, man of God, second Elias, the last prophet, 
&c. ; and when he died, it seemed as if an oracle had been 
struck dumb." 

Had not the church been denominated by the name of 
this distinguished servant of Christ ; had not his works but 
the bible been regarded as the grand source of religious 
light, as the grand subject of continued study; and had the 
Augsburg Confession alone been received as an auxiliary 
test ; the church would have enjoyed much more peace, and 
the whole field of doctrine, except the few points deter- 
mined in that confession, would have been open to free 
continued study and scrutiny in the light of Cod's word. 
But instead of finding fault with those theological heroes, 
who vanquished the hosts of Rome, for not accomplishing 
every thing ; we should be grateful to God that they were 
enabled to effect so much. 

The first feature of improvement to which we will advert, 
is the entire rejection of the authority of the Fathers in ecclesi- 
astical controversy. The grand mistake of the earlier reform* 
ers was their appeal to this authority. They were, indeed, 
enabled with these weapons, to overturn the corruptions in- 
troduced into the church after the rise of the papal hierar- 
chy ; but they also compelled themselves to retain such er- 
rors as were of earlier date. The writings of the fathers in- 
stead of being good authority for scripture doctrine, are a 
perfect labyrinth of theological errors, from which it is im- 
possible to escape with safety, and in which we look in vain 
for that unanimons consent which Rome has so loudly boast- 
ed. But it is easy to establish by the authority of Ante- 
nicene fathers, the several errors retained by the earlier 
reformers, and since rejected by the mass of Protestants. 

In short it is a principle which the experience of ages 
has clearly established, that in all controversies about the 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER ANISM. 61 

proper doctrines, or duties, or forms of Christianity, the 
bible, the whole bible, and nothing but the bible, must be the 
armor of the Protestant. To concede to Romanists or oth- 
ers the necessity of an appeal to patristic authority, is a 
tacit denial of the word of God, as the sufficient and only 
rule of faith and practice, the only ground on which Protest- 
antism can be permanently and triumphantly sustained. 

Another feature of improvement in the Lutheran church 
consists in her no longer requiring assent to the doctrine of the 
real presence of the Saviour in Vie eucharist. 1 On this subject 
her views have not unfrequently been misapprehended and 
misstated. It is indeed true, that she did entertain opinions 
on this topic different from the other churches. This differ- 
ence was however by no means so great as is at present sup- 
posed by the less intelligent part of the community. Calvin 
and the early English reformers, employed language nearly, 
and in some cases, quite as strong as that found in the 
Lutheran symbols. The Augsburg Confession affirms, ' ' that 
the body and blood of Christ are actually present {yere 
adsint), and the German copy adds, under the form or em- 
blems of bread and wine and dispensed to the communicants." 2 
Calvin employs language about as strong : he says in the 
mystery of the supper, by the emblems of bread and wine, 
Christ is really exhibited to us, that is, his body and blood, 
in which he yielded full obedience, in order to work out a 
righteousness for us ; by which, in the first place, we may, 
as it were, coalesce into one body with him; and, secondly, 
being made partakers of the substance of himself, also 
be strengthened by the reception of every blessing. 3 In 

(1) From this, and the other items of this part of our discourse, the in- 
telligent reader will perceive what gross misrepresentations are circulated, 
ignorantly we trust, hy the publishers of Buck's Theological Dictionary, 
and by such living authors as Mr. Goodrich, (in his Eccles. Hist.) who 
represent the L nth era a church of the present day, as resembling the Ro- 
man Catholics more nearly than does any other Protestant ohurch ! After 
the repeated publications, made by the Lutherans in this country, it is un- 
worthy of professed historians to transmit to yet another • generation these 
hereditary statements. As to the private ministers, who occasionally in- 
form their hearers, that their Lutheran neighbors believe in consubstantia- 
tion, &c. as we wish not to impute intentional misrepresentation, we must 
attribute their error to want of information. 

(2) Augsburg Confession, Art. x. 

(3) Dico igitur in coeuce mysterio per symbola panis et vini Christum 
vere nobis exhiberi, adeoque Corpus et sanguinem ejus, in puibus omnem 

6 



62 PORTRAITURE OP LUTHER ANlSM. 

the Episcopal church, Cranmer, one of her earliest and 
ablest reformers, in the reign of Henry VIII., published 
his translation of the catechism of Justus Jonas, with 
amendments, in 1 548, to which he professed to adhere till 
his death, 1 and in which he uses this language: "Christ 
saith of the bread 'this is my body;' and of the cup he 
saith 'this is my blood/ "Wherefore we ought to believe 
that in the sacrament we receive truly the body and blood 
of Christ. For God is almighty ; he is able, therefore, to 
do all things what he will." 2 His friend and fellow martyr, 
Ridley, at his last trial says : "I agree that 'the sacrament 
is the very true and natural body and blood of Christ, even 
that which was born of the Virgin Mary, which ascended 
into heaven, which sitteth on the right hand of God, the 
Father, which shall come from thence to judge the quick 
and the dead, only I differ in the way and manner of 
being," 3 &c. It is admitted, these same writers professed 
to mean a spiritual presence, and so did also the Lutheran 
reformers, who explicitly declare in the Formula Concordicef 
"By that word (spiritually) we exokide those Capemaitish 
notions concerning a gross and carnal presence, which have 
been attributed to our churches by the sacramentarians, in 
defiance of all our public protestations against them. And 
when we use this term, (spiritually,) we wish to be under- 
stood as signifying that the body and blood are received, 
and eaten, and drank spiritually in the Lord's supper. For 
although the participation is effected by the mouth, the man- 
ner in which it is done is spiritual." At the present day, it 
is pretty generally agreed by Protestants, that to talk of the 
spiritual presence of a material body, or the spiritual eat- 
ing and drinking of a material body and blood, is to employ 
language that conveys no distinct ideas. We, however, 
cheerfully concede that the other Protestant denominations 
relinquished these views of their early reformers, more 

ol>edientiam pro comparanda nobis justitia adimplevit : quo scilicet, prim- 
um, in unum corpus cum ipso coalescamus ; deinde participes substantise 
ejus facit, in bonorum omnium communicatione virtutem quoque sentia- 
mus. — Institut. Lib. iv. c. xvii. 11. 

(1) See his works, ii. 440 ; iii. 13, 279, 344; and Hook's Discourse, 
p. 96. 

(2) Hook, p. 96. 

(3) Hook's Discourse, p. 99. . r- 

(4) Art. vii, No. 21, p. 604. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAKISM. 63 

speedily and with less controversy than did the Lutheran 
church. It was indeed reported that Lu^ier himself shortly 
before his death, in a confidential conversation with Melanc- 
thon, acknowledged that he had gone too far in regard to 
the eucharist. But, much as we should be pleased to be- 
lieve that our great and good reformer had made such an 
acknowledgment, the evidence appears unsatisfactory; or 
at most, he may have admitted, that he had exhibited too 
much warmth in the controversy, or overrated the import- 
ance of his peculiar views. 1 At the present day, whilst 
some shades of difference exist in the Lutheran church, all 
are permitted to enjoy their opinions in peace, and the most 
generally received view, if we mistake not, is : "That there 
is no presence of the glorified human nature of the Saviour, 
either substantial or influential ; nor any thing mysterious 
or supernatural in the eucharist ; yet, that whilst the bread 
and wine are merely symbolic representations of the Sa- 
viour's absent body, by which we are reminded of his suf- 
ferings, there is also a special spiritual blessing bestowed by 
the divine Saviour on all worthy communicants, by which 
their faith and Christian graces are confirmed. 2 

The third item of improvement is the relinquishment of a 
much abused custom connected with the preparation for 
communion. The reformers and their successors had sub- 
stantially repudiated as unscriptural and corrupting what 
constituted the essential features of Romish private confes- 
sion, namely : the pretence that the priest is in the place of 
God ; that every individual sin, even the secret thoughts and 
feelings of the heart must be individually detailed to the 
priest, as essential to pardon ; and that the priest possesses 
the absolute power to forgive these sins. Yet the reformers 
deemed it useful, that before communion, each communi- 
cant should have a private interview with the pastor, and 
give him an account of the state of his soul, and his pro- 
gress in the divine life ; in order that the minister might 
give him instruction and advice, and if the case warranted 
it, encourage the applicant with the promise of pardon from 
God. This custom, in order to give as little offense as pos- 

(1) It is said, Melancthon communicated the fact to Professor Alesius, 
of Leipsic, from whom Pfuhlrnan, one of his students, heard it. 

(2) See the Author's Popular Theology, p. 303, 5th ed. 



64 PORTRAITURE OF LUTH ER ANIS M. 

sible, they denominated, though very inappropriately, con- 
fession. They had rejected the thing, and therefore it 
would have been more consistent not to retain the name. 
Yet, against this custom, it would be difficult to allege any 
valid objection, except its misapprehension and consequent 
abuse by the ignorant. Thus explained, confession was 
approved by Calvin, 1 Peter Martyr, 2 Werenfels, 3 Heidegger, 4 
Hornbeck, 5 Jurien, 6 and other distinguished Reformed di- 
vines. But even this custom has been almost entirely aban- 
doned, and the .preparation for communion consists in a 
public preparatory discourse, public and united confession 
of sins, and rehearsal of the promises of divine mercy, sim- 
ilar to the preparatory exercises of other churches. The 
only difference is, that in the Lutheran and Episcopal 
churches, which use liturgies, these exercises of confession 
of sins and exhibition of, divine promises of pardon, are 
conducted according to a settled form, whilst in others they 
are extemporaneous. Yet in the numerous Lutheran litur- 
gies we have seen, including those of Sweden 7 and Norway, 
the minister never professes to forgive sins himself, nor even 
to announce the divine promises of pardon unconditionally 
to all, but limits them to truly penitent believers ; whilst the 
impenitent and unbelieving are expressly told that God will 
not pardon their sins, but inflict deserved punishment on 
them. This formal annunciation of the divine promise of 
forgiveness, thus conditionally made, is edifying to intelli- 
gent minds, especially as the Saviour himself, in the Words 
of the institution., mentions "remission of sins" as the de- 
sign of that death which we are to commemorate in the 
eucharist. Yet as it is easily perverted into certain pardon 
by the less informed, who may erroneously conceive them- 
selves penitent, and as the scriptures contain no special 
promise of pardon at communion, more than in the perform- 
ance of any other duty ; the utmost caution should be ob- 
served against misapprehension, and the annunciation itself 

(1) Institutions, Christ. Relig; Lib. iii. cap. iv. 12, 13; see Appendix 
note E. 

(2) Loci Theologici, De Poenitentia, p. 1023. 

(3) Opusc. Theol. Philosph. et Philolog. Tom. ii. p v 320. 

(4) Manuduct. in viam concorgire Protestantium, Diatr. i. § 20, p. 39. 

(5) Koecher's Vertheidigung, p. 529. 

(6) Consultat.. de pace Protest. Pt. ii. cap. xiii. p. 272. 

(7) Shubert's Schwedische Kirehenverfassung, vol. ii. p. 63. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHEKAS1SM. 65 

is veiy properly often thrown into the form of a prayer, 1 as 
is also done in the Episcopal liturgy. 

The fourth item of improvement is the entire rejection of 
every remnant of papal superstition in the administration of 
baptism. The Romanists maintain, that unbaptised persons 
are possessed by evil spirits, and that the priest possesses 
the power by adjuration to expel them. This ceremony, 
termed exorcism, is performed by the priest with a multitude 
of formalities. Luther, and the other early reformers, re- 
jected both these principles ; yet retained some kind of ad- 
juration as a symbolic acknowledgment of the natural de- 
pravity of all men. To this they were probably led by 
their lingering regard for the early fathers. For, something 
of this kind was practiced even in the third century, when 
the corrupting influence of the New Platonists was first 
felt in the church ; and it was defended by such men as 
Cyprian 2 and Augustine. 3 Yet many of our churches were 
from the beoinnino; unwilling to retain the semblance of this 
ceremony, even as a declaration of natural depravity, and 
accordingly it was totally rejected from the liturgy and di- 
rectory for worship, published at Augsburg seven years 
after the celebrated diet of that place, namely in 1537; as 
also in that of Strasburg, published in 1 543, of Nuremberg, 
published in the same year, and in many others. 4 In dif- 
ferent kingdoms it was long since wholly rejected, whilst in 
others, phraseology more or less resembling it was long 
retained. 

The fifth item of improvement in the Lutheran church is 
the more systematic adjustment of her doctrines. Luther 
was so incessantly employed in the great work of reforming 
the church from the corruptions and superstitions of Rome, 
that he had little leisure for abstract reflections on the re- 
ciprocal relations of the scripture doctrines, and on the 

(1) c: Almighty God. our Heavenly Father, who of his great mercy hath 
promised forgiveness of sins to all those who with hearty repentance and 
true faith turn unto him, have mercy upon you ; pardon and deliver you. 
from all your sins ; confirm and strengthen you in all goodness ; and bring 
you to everlasting life, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen." — Episco- 
pal Communion Service, p. 155. 

(2) Epist. 69, p. 187; Epist. 75, p. 223. 

(3) In Lib. de Fide et operibus, cap. vi. and Lib. 7, cap. 34, contra Pe» 
lagium, Lib. ii. cap. 40, and Koecher's Vertheidigung, p. 509. 

(4) Siegel's Handbuch, vol. ii. p. 6S6. 

6a 



66 PORTRAITURE OF L UTHE RANIS M. 

entire and minute consistency of his views with each other. 
It is certain that in the earlier part of his life, he believed 
the Augustinian view of predestination. His work, on the 
Bondage of the Will, published in 1525, must put this ques- 
tion to rest. But he at the same time entertained other 
views inconsistent with this. Melanchton, who had em- 
braced Luther's unadjusted views of doctrine, led the way in 
the process of harmonizing their conflicting elements, by the 
rejection of absolute predestination. Luther himself adopted 
these modifications, and long before he died, preached and 
taught what have ever since been the doctrines of the Lu- 
theran standards. The particulars of this interesting pro- 
cess are detailed in Dr. Plank's invaluable History of the 
Rise, Changes and Formation of the Protestant System of 
Doctrines. 1 During the reign of infidelity in Europe, when 
an unbaptized philosophy had desecrated the sanctuary of 
God, and so far effaced all lineaments and extinguished all 
attachment to genuine p^otestant Christianity, that even a 
Buonaparte could contemplate as a matter of state policy 
the re-establishment of the Romish religion over all protest- 
ant Germany ; 2 the doctrines of great reformers Avere for- 
saken by many. But thanks be to God, the cause of truth 
is again prospering, orthodoxy is again preponderant in 
Germany ; and in the Lutheran church in this country the 
great doctrines of the reformation are taught as universally, 
as in any other denomination of Christians in our land. 

The sixth feature of improvement is the adoption of a 
more regular and rigid system of church government and 
discipline in this country. The union between church and 
state has prevented the adoption of an independent and 
thoroughly scriptural discipline in the Lutheran, as well as 
in all the other established churches of Europe. Kings and 
princes are not willing to be disciplined by humble minis- 
ters and lay elders. Accordingly, the systems of discipline 
in different provinces and kingdoms are different, and gene- 
rally very lax. In this country our General Synod has 
adopted and recommended a system, which, it is believed, 
contains all the prescriptions of the Saviour and his apostles, 

(1) Dr. Plank's Geschichte &c, vol. vi. p. 806—809. See Appendix. 
No. H. 

(2) Butler's Reminiscences, p. 200. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHE R AN ISM, 67 

and all that appeared most valuable in the systems of the 
different other churches. The government and discipline 
of each individual church, is essentially like that of our 
Presbyterian brethren. Our Synods, also, in structure and 
powers, most resemble their Presbyteries, having fewer for- 
malities in their proceedings, and frequently couching their 
decisions in the form of recommendations. Our General 
Synod is wholly an advisory body, resembling the conso- 
ciations of the Congregational churches in New England. 
In addition to these regular ecclesiastical bodies, constitu- 
ting our system of government, we having special Confer- 
ences, for the purpose of holding stated protracted meetings. 
These are subdivisions of Synods, containing ordinarily 
from five to ten ministers each, who are annually to hold 
several protracted meetings within the bounds of their dis- 
trict. The chief object of these meetings is, to awaken and 
convert sinners, and to edify believers by close, practical 
preaching. This feature mainly resembles the quarterly 
meetings of our Methodist brethren, and presents to pious 
and zealous ministers, who are thirsting for the salvation of 
souls, the most direct opportunity they can desire, to glorify 
God, and advance his spiritual kingdom. Yet all these 
meetings are to be conducted as the scriptures enjoin, "de- 
cently and in order." 1 This system of government is not 
yet adopted by all our Synods ; yet its general features, 
with perhaps a greater admixture of Congregationalism, 
substantially pervade those Synods also, which have not yet 
united with the General Synod. 

The last item of improvement to which we shall refer, 
is the practice of the Lutheran church in this country, not 
to bind her ministers to the minutiae of anv human creed. 



(1) The views of Christian, order in worship, inculcated by our standards, 
may be seen from chap. vii. see. 1, of our Formula. -'These meetings 
(prayer meetings) may be held in the church, school-house, or in private 
houses ; and their object is the spiritual edification of the persons present; 
but the utmost precaution must ever be observed, that God, who is a Spirit, 
be worshipped in spirit and in truth ; that they be characterized by that 
solemnity and decorum wbich ought ever to attend divine worship, and 
that no disorder be tolerated, or any thing that is calculated to interrupt 
the devotions of those who are convened, or prevent their giving the full 
est attention to him who is engaged in leading the meeting, — in short, 
that according to tbe injunction of the apostle, all things be done :; de- 
cently and in order. 3 ' 



68 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

The bible and the belief that the fundamental doctrines of the 
bible are taught in a manner substantially correct in the Augs- 
burg Confession, is all that is required. On the one hand, 
we regard it as certain, that if we would be faithful to the 
injunction of our text, "not to receive any who come to us 
bringing another doctrine," an examination of applicants 
for admission among us is indispensable. Such an exam- 
ination is virtually a requisition of their creed, that we may 
compare it with our own. Now, whether the articles to 
which we require their assent be few or many, be written 
or oral, they are a creed, and obviously its reduction to 
paper, presents some material facilities in the examination. 
A written creed, therefore, seems necessary to the purity of 
the church. On the other hand, history informs us, that 
for several hundred years after the days of the apostles, no 
other creed was used in the whole church than that called 
the Apostles' Creed, because admitted by all to contain the 
principal doctrines taught by the apostles. This creed em- 
bodied only the cardinal doctrines of the gospel, which all 
the so called orthodox denominations of the present day do 
actually believe ; and yet the assent to these few doctrines 
did for centuries after the apostolic age, secure admission to 
any and every part of the Catholic, that is, the universal 
church on earth. By what authority then did the several 
Protestant denominations after the Reformation adopt creeds 
ten, and some of them, a hundred times as long as that used 
in the earlier ages, and require assent to these interminable 
instruments as a condition of admission to their churches ? 
The bible certainly confers no such authority. But does 
the experience of three centuries prove their influence to be 
salutary? Have they not rather been the occasion of 
endless strife in all the churches adopting them? Have 
they not proved wedges of dissension to split asunder the 
body of Christ ? It is matter of historical certainty, that 
the orthodox denominations of the present day coincide as 
much in doctrinal views, as did the Christians in the golden 
age of Christianity. If they could walk together in love, 
and their minor differences created no difficulty then ; why 
should not Christians in the present day unite in the same 
manner, instead of rending the body of Christ asunder, 
creating separate and conflicting interests among breth- 
ren in Christ, alienation and prosecutions for minor differ- 



PORTRAITURE OF LXTTHE R ANISM. 69 

ences, whicli would not have been noticed in the apostolic, 
and primitive, and purest age of the church. The duty of 
all parts of the Christian church seems therefore to be, to 
return to the use of shorter doctrinal creeds as tests of ec- 
clesiastical, ministerial, and sacramental communion. This 
noble course the Lutheran church has already virtually 
taken, by requiring assent only to the fundamental doctrines 
of the Augsburg Confession, together with an approval of 
our principles of government and worship. This course 
cannot fail to promote brotherly love, and fraternal appre- 
ciation between different denominations, by giving promi- 
nence to their actual unity in doctrine, and restoring a 
proper unity of spirit among the disciples of Christ. Hap- 
py, thrice happy too is the Lutheran church, that she, who 
was first to cast off the yoke of Roman superstition and 
Oppression, should lead the way in breaking the bonds of 
Protestant sectarianism ; be first in practically teaching the 
world: that the apostolic injunction to, "receive a brother - 
that is weak in the faith, but not for the purpose of doubt- 
ful disputation," does not mean to prosecute and expel him. 
And happy are all in every denomination who raise their 
voice in behalf of the lacerated body of Christ, and teach 
Christians to remember the solemn injunction of the Sa- 
viour to love one another ; and not only to profess but to 
practise the principle of our blessed Lord, "one is our Mas- 
ter Christ, and ye are all brethren." 

Such, my brethren, are the features of the Lutheran 
church, oY"that church, to whose service this chaste and 
beautiful edifice has been dedicated. She may be emphat- 
ically styled the church of the Reformation. She holds 
the grand doctrines of Christianity, with fewer appended 
peculiarities than most other denominations. With the Cal- 
vinist she holds the graciousness of salvation ; with the 
Congregationalist she believes that Christ tasted death for 
every man ; with the Methodist she approves of regularly 
recurring protracted meetings ; with the Episcopalian she 
occasionally employs a liturgy and forms of prayer ; with 
the German Reformed she agre-es in the instruction and 
confirmation of Catechumens ; and with all she unites in 
ascribing all the glory of our privileges on earth and hopes 
in heaven, to that Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins 
of the world. Long may those blessed doctrines be taught 



70 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHEEANISM. 

within these sacred walls ! Long may they be taught 
throughout our favored land, purifying and elevating our 
political and social institutions, providing for our citizens, 
security of person and property, and especially the privi- 
lege of worshiping God under our own vine and fig tree, 
making it the land of refuge to the virtuous oppressed of 
all nations. 



APPENDIX. 



Note A. to page 49. 

, TESTIMONY, OF CARDINAL BARONIUS ON PAPAL APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. 

"What was then (in the tenth century) the aspect of the 
holy Romish church? How extremely filthy was she, (fce- 
dissima!) When the most powerful and obscene prostitutes 
governed at Rome ; and at their pleasure, the occupants of 
the holy seat were changed, bishops were appointed, and 
what is unutterably horrible to hear, their paramours were 
thrust into the chair of St. Peter as false pontiffs, who are 
introduced into the catalogue of popes only for the purpose 
of making a record of the times. For who could pronounce 
those to be legitimate Roman pontiffs, who were thus in- 
truded by these prostitutes, contrary to law ? There is not 
the least mention made of their having been elected by the 
clergy, or of their election having been afterward sanc- 
tioned by them. All the canons were passed over in silence ; 
the decrees of the popes were suppressed; the ancient 
usages and rules for the election of the popes, as well as 
the solemn rites and ceremonies were altogether abolished. 
Annalium ecclesiast. Tom. X. ad An. 912 num. 8 p. 685. 
apud Kcecher's Yertheidigung, p. 124. 

Note G. to page 49. 

MINISTERIAL ORDINATION. 

The subject of ministerial ordination has been involved in 
some extraneous and unnecessary difficulty, partly by the 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 71 

incidental usage of language, partly by the progress of super- 
stition in the lapse of ages, and. partly by the introduction 
of diocesan episcopacy into the Christian church in the sec- 
ond century. The term ordination (ordinatid) has, in the 
Christian church, generally acquired a technical character, 
and is used to designate the specific method or formalities 
with which it is customary in any particular church to : in- 
vest a candidate or licentiate with the ministerial office. 
But in the New-Testament, no such a technical word is 
found. On the contrary, different words are used in the 
several passages, and all of them are appellative terms, sig- 
nifying merely to appoint, to induct, or to admit ; and they 
are also applied to other objects. In some cases, the laying 
on of hands is mentioned, as the method by which the indi- 
vidual was set apart; and it was the superstitious notion of 
after ages,- that some mystic influence was imparted by "the 
laying on of the hands," which probably led the Romish 
church to exalt this rite into a- sacrament. .This error, the 
Reformers rejected and brought back the ceremony to" its 
original simplicity. -. ' . 

To ordain, according to the New Testament, merely sig- 
nifies to induct into .the sacred office. It implies, that some 
care was exercised, and not every one indiscriminately al- 
lowed to perform the duties of the sacred office ; but it does 
not in the least imply that any particular influence or power 
is transmitted by lineal succession from, the apostles. ., 

As to the persons who are, to perform this rite, that is, 
are to induct others into the sacred office, we find that Paul 
and Barnabas, in traveling through Antioch and other 
places, ''chose- (ordained) elders for them." Paul and Bar- 
nabas had been set apart for the missionary work by' the 
laying on of the hands,. not of a diocesan bishop, but of 
certain prophets, and teachers ; namely, Simeon, Lucius, %nd 
Manaen. Timothy was inducted (ordained) by the laying 
on of the hands, not of a bishop of a diocese, "but of the 
ministry; that is, eldership, or, to retain the Greek word, 
the presbytery." In several cases, also, individual: minis- 
ters, such as Timothy and Titus, were directed to induct 
(ordain) others. .-..,- 

The principal passages involved in the. subject of ordina- 
tion, are the following, from which the reader may • learn 
the scripture aspect of this rite. 



72 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

Acts xiv. 23. And when they (Paul and Barnabas) had 
ordained (^sS^orovrjo'avTStf-, had chosen; from x si i» nan d> an d 
tsjvw, to stretch forth, voting by uplifted hand ; De Wette, 
erwahlet. ££e 2 Cor. viii. 19, where the same word is ren- 
dered " chosen" in our common version) elders for them in 
every church, and had prayed with fasting, they com- 
mended them to the Lord, on whom they believed. 

1 Tim. iv. 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which 
was given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the 
hands of the presbytery, (^sC^uti^is, the eldership, that 
is, of the ministers, not of a diocesan bishop.) 

1 Tim. v. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man, (x S1 ^ 

Acts xiii. 3. And when they (that is, not bishops, but 
"certain prophets and teachers, as Barnabas, and Simeon, 
and Lucius, and Manaen, v. 1) had fasted and prayed and 
laid their hands on them, (sflridsv<rstf racf Xstgota',) they sent 
them away. 

Acts vi. 6. Whom (namely, the seven deacons whom the 
"multitude of the disciples" had chosen, v. 4, 5) they set 
before the apostles ; and when they had prayed, they laid 
their hands on them, (^itiSsrixav avroltf rati ysi^ctd.) 

The above are all the actual ordinations recorded in the 
New Testament. The following are the other passages in 
which the word "ordain" occurs in our English New Tes- 
tament in reference to the church. We add the Greek to 
show how various the words are in the original. 

Mark iii. 14. Jesus ordained (stfoirjtfs, made, appointed; 
Stoltz, bestimmte; De Wette, bestellete) twelve to be with 
him, <fec. 

" 1 Cor. vii. 17. So ordain I (Siaratfrfo^ui, direct; Schleus- 
ner verordne) in all the churches. 

1 Tim. ii. 7. For this purpose (says Paul) I am ordained 
(<rs&r,v, appointed; Stoltz, gesetzet; De Wette, bestellet) a 
preacher, (^fug.) 

Heb. v. 1. For every high priest is ordained for men, 
&c, (xc/Ji(ra<rai, placed, appointed; Stoltz, eingesetzt; De 
Wette, bestellet.) 

Heb. viii. 3. For every high priest is ordained, (xafiitfarai, 
placed, appointed; Stoltz, eingesetzt; De Wette, bestellet.) 

Tit. i. 5. For this end left I thee in Crete, (says Paul to 
Titus, ) that thou shouldst ordain elders (xa<ra,&rr)<fY}(f #(>$<?* 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAN ISM. 73 

fivTEgaif, Stoltz, einsetzest; De Wette, anstelletest, ) as I 
appointed (^srafa/x'/jv tfoi, directed; Stoltz, geboten ; De 
Wette, geboten) thee. 

From these passages, it is evident, that the scriptures 
contain not a word about the transmission of any mystic, or 
sacred influence or power, by succession from the apostles. 
And it is also evident, that in not one of the three examples 
of ordination or induction, mentioned in the ISew Testa- 
ment, was that rite performed by one man, and he a dio- 
cesan bishop ; but always by several persons, in the one 
case, by Paul and Barnabas, in another, by "certain pro- 
phets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius and Manaen ; 
and in the third, by the eldership, that is, the ministry. 
Yet, as the apostle Paul directed Timothy and Titus to ad- 
mit men to this office, we regard the ordination of one 
minister as valid, whether he be called bishop, or minister, 
or elder. 

ISTOTE B. TO PAGE 56. 

LUTHERAN CHURCH IN SWEDEN. NORWAY AND FINLAND. 

A most interesting, satisfactory and authentic work on 
the state of the Lutheran church in Sweden, was published 
in 1821-1822, by Dr. Frederick William Von Shubert, pro- 
fessor of Theology in the university at Greifswald. From 
this work, it appears that Sweden is at present divided into 
twelve dioceses or districts, as follows; 

1. The diocese of Upsala, in which the archbishop re- 
sides. This diocese contains 166 pastoral districts, and 244 
churches. 

2. The diocese of Linkqping, embracing 147 pastoral 
districts, and 216 churches. 

3. The diocese of Skara, includes 113 pastoral districts, 
and 360 churches. 

4. Diocese of Strengnas, contains 102 pastoral districts, 
and 170 churches. 

5. Diocese of Westerns, has 84 pastoral districts, and 120 
churches. 

6. Diocese of Wexio, includes 98 pastoral districts, and 
185 churches. 

7. Diocese of Lunds, has 223 pastoral districts-, and 431 
churches. 



74 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

8. Diocese of Goeiheburg, includes 102 pastoral districts, 
and 262 churches. 

9. Diocese of Salmar, contains 45 pastoral districts, and 
58 churches. 

10. Diocese of Carhtad, embraces 40 pastoral districts, 
and 129 churches. 

11. Diocese of Ilernosand, includes 63 pastoral districts, 
and 162 churches. 

12. Diocese of Wisby, contains 43 pastoral districts, and 
92 churches. 

FINLAND 

Embraces two dioceses, viz: that of Abo, containing 127 
pastoral districts, and that of Borgo, including 83 pastoral 
districts, including a German one in Wiborg. 

NORWAY 

Is divided into four districts or dioceses, viz : 

1. Diocese of Christiania or Oggerthus. 

2. Diocese of Christiansand. 

3. Diocese of Bergen. 

4. Diocese of Drontheim. 

Note C. to page 58. 
Of the Theologians and Theological Literature of the Lu- 
theran church in Europe, our space will not allow us to 
attempt even an outline. A volume would be requisite for 
this purpose. A catalogue of the publications by Lutheran 
divines in this country, may, however, not be uninteresting 
to many of our readers. All these works, with the excep- 
tion of a few, are contained in the writer's library. Of that 
few, the following notices are given from memory. 

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS BY LUTHERAN MINIS- 
TERS IN THE UNITED STATES* 

The names are arranged chronologically, as far as known to the writer* 

Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, D. D., Principal : 

Author of the Hallische Nachrichten, 1 vol. 4to., pp. 1580, 
Halle, 1747-1763. 

*For a select list of the principal Lutheran Theologians and theological 
productions of Europe, see the author's Popular Theology, 5 ed.. Appendix. 

The above list, first prepared by us for this work, in 1840, has been 
transferred to the Lutheran Almanac for 1851, with some later additions, 
which, in turn, we also adopt, with other additions. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 75 

John Frederick Handschuh, next Principal : 
Author of Hallische Nachrichten, 1747-1763. 

Just. H. Helmuth, D. D., Pastor in Philadelphia: 
Taufe und Heilige Schrift, Germantown, 1793, 8vo., pp. 336. 
Unterhaltungen mit Gott. 8vo., pp. 180, (anonymous.) 
Geistliche Lieder, 12mo., pp. 200. 
Numerous pious works for children. 

John C. Kuxze, D. D., member of Am. Philosophical 
Society, Pastor, N. Y.: 
Ein Wort fur den Verstand und das Herz, 8vo.,pp. 243, Phila., 

1781. 
English Hymn Book — much of it tranlasted from the German. 
History of the Christian Religion, and History of the Lutheran 

Church. 
Geistliche Gedichte, in 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 20.0. 
New Method of calculating the great Eclipse of June 16th, 

1806. 

Gotthilf Hen. Muhlenberg D. D., Pastor in Lancaster : 
Rebe bei der Einweihung des Franklin Collegiums, Lancaster, 

1788. 
Catalogus Plantarum, &c. 
Flora Lancastriensis, 8vo. 

English and German Lexicon and Grammar, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Grasses of Pennsylvania. 

Rev. Jacob Goering, Pastor in York, Pa.: 

Besiegter Wiedertaufer, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 92, 1783, (anon.) 
Answer to a Methodist's Remonstrance, York, (anon.) 
Der Verkappte Priester Aaron, (uber die Siebentager,) about 
1790. 

Rev. F. V. Melsheimer, Senior Pastor, Hanover, Pa.: 
Wahrheit der Christlichen Religion, mit Beantwortung Deisti- 

scher Einwurfe, 1 vol. 8vo. 
Gesprache zwischen einem Protestanten and Romischen Pries- 
ter, Hanover, 1797, 1 vol. 18mo., pp. 122. 

Fred. H. Quitman, D. D., Pastor at Rheinbeck, N. Y.: 

Sermons on the Reformation, Hudson, 1817. 
Evangelical Catechism, Hudson, 1814. 
Hymn Book of the Synod of New York edit., 1817. 
Treatise on Magic. 

J. D. Kurtz, D.D., Pastor, Baltimore: 
Gemeinschaftliches Gesangbuch, editor, Bait., 1817, 



76 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

Various articles in the " Evangelische Magazin." 

Paulus Henkle, Newmarket, Va.: 
Sammhmg Geistreicher Lieder, Newmarket. 
Also, several small works for children. 

J. G. Schmucker, D.D., Pastor, York, Pa.: 
Prophetic History of the Christian Religion, or Explanation of 

Revelation of St. John, 2 vols. 8vo., Bait, 1817. 
Vornehmste Weissagungen der Heiligen Schrift, Hagerstown, 

1807, 1 vol. 12mo. 
Wachterstimme an Zion's Kinder, Gettysburg, 1838, 1 vol. 12mo. 

pp. 233. 
Reformations Geschichte zur Jubelfeier der Reformation, York, 

1817, pp. 32. 
Elegie zum Andenken an Goering. 
Schwarmergeist unserer Tage. entlarvt, zur Warming erweckter 

Seelen, York, 1827, pp. 52. 
Lieder Anhang, zum Evang. Gesangbuch der General Synode, 

1833. 
Erhlarung der ofTenbung Johannis, Bait., 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 347. 

J. George Lochman, D. D., Pastor, Harrisburg, Pa.: 
History, Doctrine and Discipline of the Lutheran church, 1 vol. 

12mo., pp. 165, Harrisburg, 1816. 
Evangelical Catechism, Harrisburg, 1822, pp. 56. 
Introductory Sermon, Harrisburg. 
Valedictory Sermon, Lebanon, 1815. 
Hinterlassene Predigten, 1828, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 334. 

Dr. Endress : 

Christi Regiment mit weltlicher Monarchic und Aristocratie 

unvereinbar, 12mo., 1791. 
Also, posthumous Sermons, published in Lutheran Preacher and 

Pulpit. 

Rev. Flohr, Wythe County, Ya.: 
Sermons, (posthumous.) 

Rev. G. Shober, Pastor, Salem, N. C: 
History of the Lutheran Reformation and Lutheran Church, 

Baltimore, 1818, 12mo., pp. 213. 
Scenes in the World of Spirits, translated from the German of 

Stilling; Review, &c, 8vo. 

E. L. Hazelius, D.D., Prof, in Theol. Seminary, Lex- 
ington, S. C: 
Life of Luther, New York, 1813, 12mo., pp. .1.69. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER ANISM. 77 

Life of Stilling, from the German, Gettysburg, 1831, pp. 415. 

Augsburg Confession, with Annotations. 

Evangelisches Magazin, edit. 1831. 

Materials for Catechisation on Passages of Scripture, 1823, pp. 

76. 
Church History, Bait., vol. 1, 1842, pp. 277. 
History of the Lutheran Church in America, Zanesville, Ohio, 

1845, 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 300. 
Inaugural Address, Lexington, S. Car., 1834. 

Augustus Wackerhagen, D. D., Pastor, Clermont, New 
York : 
InbegrifT der Glaubens und Sittenlehre, Philadelphia, 1804, 1 

vol. 12mo.,pp. 299. 

F. D. Schaeffer, Sr., D. D., Pastor, Phil'a.: 
Antwort auf eine Vertheidigung der Methodisten, Germantown, 
1806. 

John Bachman, D.D., Charleston, S. C: 
The Quadrupeds of North America, 3 vols. 
The Doctrine of the Unity of the Human Race examined on 

the Principles of Science. 
The Design and Duties of the Christian Ministry, a Sermon, 

preached before General Synod, N. Y., 1848, pp. 23. 
A Sermon on the Doctrines and Discipline of the Lutheran 

Church. 
Funeral Discourse on the Death of Rev. John G. Swartz. 
Address before the Washington Total Abstinence Society of 

Charleston. 
An Inquiry into the Nature and Benefits of an Agricultural 

Survey. 
An Address before the Horticultural Society of Charleston. 
Catalogue of Phaenogamous Plants and Ferns growing in the 

vicinity of Charleston. 

F. C. Schaeffer, D.D., Pastor, New York: 
German Correspondent, 1 vol., 8vo. 
Sermon at Centurial Jubilee of Reformation, N. York, 1817, 

pp. 56. 
Parables and Parabolic Sayings, 1 vol. 18mo. 

Rev. Dr. Ernst, Lebanon, Pa.: 
Sermon on the Death of Washington. 

B. Kurtz, D.D., Editor Lutheran Observer: 

First Principles of Religion for Children, Hagerstown, 1821. 
7a 



78 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM, 

Sermon on Sabbath Schools. 

Faith, Hope, Charity, Hagerstown, 1823. 

Pastoral Address during his tour through Europe. 

A door opened of the Lord, Introductory Sermon, Chambers- 
burg, Pa., 14th August, 1831. 

Ministerial Appeal, a Valedictory Sermon, Hagerstown, Md., 
4th Sept., 1831. 

Infant Baptism and Affusion, with Essays on related subjects, 
1840, 1 vol. 8vo., Bait., pp. 370. 

Address on Temperance, 1824. 

Why are you a Lutheran'? 1843, 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 227. 

D. F. Schaeffer, D.D., Pastor, Frederick, Maryland: 
Lutheran Intelligencer, editor, 4 vols. 8vo., 1826-1830. 

J. Herbst, Pastor, Gettysburg : 
Evangelisches Magazin, editor, 1830. 
Inaugural Address of Dr. Schmucker, translated into German, 

1826. 

Eev. Dr. Miller, Prof. Hartwick Seminary.: 

On the Fundamental Principle of the Reformation, 1831. 

Also, Sermons in the Lutheran Preacher, 1834. 

Sermon on Doctrines and Discipline of the Ev. Luth. Church, 

Nov. 12, 1837. 
Sermon on the semi-centennial celebration of N. York Synod, 

1845, pp. 25. 

G. A. Lintner, D.D., Pastor, Schoharie, N. York: 
Lutheran Magazine, co-editor, 2 vols., 1827-'28. 
Liturgy, published by the General Synod, 1832. 
Sermon at the Installation of Rev. Lawyer, 1828. 
Augsburg Confession, with Notes, 1837. 
Sermon on Truth as the Bond of Union, 1841, pp. 19. 

C. R. Demme, D.D., Pastor, Philadelphia: 
Die Werke des Flavius Josephus, in berichtigter Ubersetzung, 

und mit Anmerkungen, Phil'a., 1839, 1 vol. 4to. 
f£ Die Letzte Ehre," eine Leichenrede, beim absterben des 

Hochw. J. H. C. Helmuth, Phil'a., 1825. 
Synodal Predigt, 1839. 

C. P. Krauth, D.D., Prof, at Theo. Sem., Gettysburg: 
Lutheran Intelligencer, co-editor, 1826. 
Lutheran Sunday School Hymn Book, editor, Philadelphia. 
Oration on the advantages of a knowledge of the German Ian- 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAN1SM. 79 

guage, before the Students of Theological Seminary, Get- 
tysburg, 1832, published by request. 
Evangelical Review, editor, 1850. 

S. S. Schmucker, D. D., Prof. Theological Seminary, 
Gettysburg : 

Biblical Theology of Storr and Flatt, translated from the Ger- 
man, Andover, 1826, 2 vols. 

Elements of Popular Theology, Andover, 1834, 1 vol. 8vo. 

Kurtzgefasste Geschichte der Christlichen Kirche, auf der 
Grundlage des Busch'en Werks, Gettysburg, 1834, 1 vol. 
8vo., pp. 352. 

Evangelisches Magazin, editor, 1830. 

Hymn Book of General Synod, compiler, 1828. 

Formula of Gov. and Discipline for Congregations and Synods, 
published by the General Synod, 1823-1829. 

Inaugural Address, Gettysburg, 1826. 

Discourse in commemoration of the Reformation, preached be- 
fore Synod, 1837, pp. 142, 18mo. 

Fraternal Appeal to the American Churches on Christian 
Union, Andover, 1838, 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 149. 

Discourse delivered at the request of the Board of Managers of 
Amer, Sunday School Union, Philadelphia, 1839. 

Christian Temple, a Synodical discourse, 1824. 

Plea for the Sabbath School System, 1830. 

Oration on Anniversary of Washington's Birth day, 1839. 

Psychology, or Elements of Mental Philosophy, New York, 
1842, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 329. 

Discourse on Capital Punishment, Phil'a., 1845. 

Portraiture of Lutheranism, 1840, pp. 89. 

Retrospect of Lutheranism, 1840. 

Patriarchs of American Lutheranism, 1845. 

Christian Pulpit, 1846. 

Papal Hierarchy, 1845. 

Church Development on apostolic principles, 1850. 

Rev. Waltz, Pastor, Hamburg, Pa.: 
Erklarung des Calenders, nebst Unterricht uber die Himmels- 
korper, Reading, 1830, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 315. 

Rev. H. K Pohlman, D.D., Albany, K Y.: 

A Catechism. 

Address on Temperance. 

Rev. H. W. Scriba, Pastor, Strasbnrg, Pa.: 
Anfangsgrunde des Christenthums fur die Jugend, aus dem, 



80 PORTRAITURE OF LTJTHERANISM. 

Franzosischen ubersetzt, Chambersburg, 1834, 1 vol. 8vo., 
pp. 143. 

Rev. D. Henkel, Pastor, Lincoln, N. C: 

On Regeneration, Salisbury, 1822, pp. 48. 

Rev. Probst : 

Wiedervereinigung der Lutheraner und Reformirten, Allenfeown, 
1826, 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 172. 

Rev. C. Henkle, Pastor, Somerset, Ohio : 
On the Reformation, a Synodical discourse, 1838. 
Ueber die Kinderzucht, 1822. 

Rev. A. H. Lochman, York, Pa.: 
Rosa of Lindenwald — translated. 

Rev. S. Eichelberger, A. M., Winchester : 
Lutheran Preacher, editor, 2 vols. 8vo., 1833, Winchester. 
Sermons on National Blessings and Obligations, 1830. 

Rev. J. G. Morris, D. D., Pastor, Baltimore: 

Catechumen's and Communicant's Companion, Baltimore, 1831s, 
1 vol. 12mo., pp. 250. 

Catechetical Exercises on Luther's Catechism, altered from the 
German, Baltimore, 1832, 18mo., pp. 72. 

Henry and Antonio of Dr. Brettschneider, translated from the 
German, 1824, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 254. 

Lutheran Observer, editor, 2 vols., 1831-1832. 

Von Leonard's Lectures on Geology, translated from the Ger- 
man, Baltimore, 1839, 1 vol. 12mo. 

Popular Exposition of the Gospels, for families, Bible classes, 
and Sunday schools, 2 vols., Bait., 1840. 

Address on the Study of Natural History, 1841. 

Sermon on the Reformation. 

Address at the Dedication of Linnasan Hall. 

Luther's Catechism Illustrated. 

Address at the Dedication of Mt. Olivet Cemetery, Bait. 

Rev. J. N. Hoffman, Pastor, Chambersburg : 
Arndt's True Christianity, translated from the German, 1 vol. 

8vo., Chambersburg, 1834. 
Evangelical Hymns, original and selected, for families and pri- 
vate circles, 1 vol. 18mo., 1838. 
A collection of Texts, &c. &c. publisher. 

Rev. T. Lape : 
Theological Sketch Book, 3 vols. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTH ERANISM. 81 

Mourners Comforted, 24mo., pp. 178, N. York. 
On Infant Baptism, Bait., 1843, pp. 93, 18mo. 

W. M. Reynolds, D. D., Pres. Capital University, Co- 
lumbus, 0. 

Monthly Magazine of Religion and Literature, editor, Gettys- 
burg," 1840, 1 vol. 8vo. 
Discourse on the Swedish Churches. 
Inaugural Address, 1850. 
Evangelical Review, editor, 1849. 

Rev. H. L. Baugher, D. D., President of Pennsylva- 
nia College, Gettysburg: 
Sermon on the Providence of God, 1831. 
Also, Sermons in the Lutheran Preacher, 1834. 

Rev. P. Rizer, Dayton, Ohio, 
-Sermon in behalf of Foreign Missions, 1850, pp. 19. 

H. J. Smith, D.D., Prof, of German Lit., Columbia Col- 
lege, New York : 

History of Education, 1 vol. 12mo., 1839. 
Inaugural Address, 1848. 
Discourse on Sabbath Schools. 
Address before the Phrenakosmian Society, Gettysburg, 1843. 

Rev. J. C. Hope, S. C: 
On Modern Universalism, Columbia, S. C, 1841, pp. 60. 
Sermon on the Missionary Cause, Lexington, S. C, 1844, pp. 24. 

Rev. L. Sternberg : 
Sermon on the Death of Gen. Jackson. 

Rev. R. Weiser, Pastor, Woodsboro', Md.: 
On Revivals of Religion, 1840. 
Life of Luther, 1 vol. 8vo., pp.. 443, Bait., 1849. 
Mourners Bench, Bedford, 1844, pp. 32. 

Rev. C. A. Smith, Rhinebeck, BT. Y.: 
Illustrations of Faith, 1850, 1 vol. 12mo., pp. 160. 
Sermons on Missions. 
Parables translated from the German of Krummacher, New 

York, 1833. 
Catechumen's Guide, 1 vol. 12mo. 

Popular Exposition of the Gospels, &c, 2 vols., Bait., 1840 a 
Lutheran Pulpit, 2 vols., edition, 1838-'39. 



82 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 

Rev. S. W. Harkey, Pastor, Frederick, Md.: 

Lutheran Sunday School Question Book, Fredericktown, 1838. 

Address before Phrenakosmian Society of Pennsylvania Col- 
lege, Gettysburg, 1837. 

The Visitor, editor, Frederick, 1840. 

Translation of Starke's Prayer Book, 1 vol. 8vo., 1844. 

The Churche's Best State, 1 vol. 12mo. 

Sermon on the Death of Gen. Harrison. 

Sermon on National Thanksgiving, 1842. 

Prisons for Women, Frederick, 1847, pp. 32. 

Rev. J. H. Bernheim, Pastor, Venango, Pa.: 
Ueber das Heilige Abendmahl, 1834, 1 vol. 12mo. 

Gottlieb Yeager, Hamburg, Pa.: 
Leben des Andreas Jackson aus dem Englishen Uebersetzt. 

Rev. Schmidt, Pastor, Pittsburg, Pa.: 
Evangelische Kirchenzeitung, editor, 2 vols., 1839-'40. 

Rev. Solomon Ritz, Xenia, 0.: 
Scriptural Dialogue on Protracted Meetings, Revivals, Prayer 

Meetings, &c, Canton, O., 1844, pp.. 35. 

Rev. S. Sprecher, D. D., President Wittenberg College, 
Springfield, Ohio : 
Inaugural Address, 1849, pp. 24. 

Rev. C. C. Guenther, New Franklin, 0.: 
Dialogue on Baptism, 1 vol. 12mo., 1848. 

C. F. Schaeffer, D. D., Lower Red Hook, N. York: 
Discourse on the Reformation of Luther, 1837. 

Rev. C. Martin, M. D.: 
Lecture on the Deleterious Effect of Tobacco, 1836*. 

Rev. S. A. Mealy, Pastor, Philadelphia: 
On the Death of Rev. Bergman, 1832. 
Also, Sermons in Lutheran Preacher, 1834. 

Rev. D. Kohler, Rutztown, Pa.: 
Biblische 4ti Juli Predigt, 1847. 

Rev. E. Keller, D.D.: 
Address before the Alumni of the Theological Seminary at 

Gettysburg, 1844. 
Inaugural Address, Springfield, Ohio. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERAN ISM. 83 

Rev. C. W. Schaeffer, Germantown : 
Sermon on History of Church in Harrisburg. 

Rev. G. Diehl, Easton, Pa.: 
Thanksgiving- Sermon, Easton. 

Rev. J. F. Smith, A.M.: 
Sermon on the Silent Influence of the Bible, 1850, pp. 26. 
Hints to Church Members, Winchester, Va., 1845. 
Sermon before the Foreign Missionary Society of the Lutheran 

Church, 1845, pp. 50. 
Address on Pulpit Eloquence, 1848, pp. 35. 

Rev. D. F. Bittle, A.M., Pastor, Middletown, Md.: 
Remarks on New Measures, 1839. 

Rev. C. A. Hat, Harrisburg, Pa.: 
Essay on Lexicography, 1845. 

Rev. C. P. Krauth, A.M., Winchester, Va.: 
The Transfiguration, 1850. 
"The Pastoral Office, a Farewell Discourse," Bait., 1845. 

Rev. W. A. Passavant, Pittsburg : 

Address before the Franklin Literary Society of Jefferson Col- 
lege. 

Funeral Sermon on the Death of Rev. M. I. Steck, pp. 29, 
1848. 

Missionary, editor, 3 vols., 1848-51. 

Rev. S. M. Schmucker, Germantown, Pa.: 

Modern Infidelity Refuted, 1 vol. 8vo., pp. 480. 
Rev. Jos. A. Seiss, Cumberland, Md.: 

Thanksgiving Discourse, 1847. 

Lectures on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 1 vol. 8vo., 1846. 

Address before th.p Excelsior and Philosophian Societies of Wit- 
tenberg College. 

Address on Intemperance, 1845. 

Rev. F. Wyxeken, St. Louis : 
Spruch Buchlein. 

Rev. J. Wixecoff : 
On Modern Dancing. 

Rev. C A. Brandt, Manayunk, Pa.: 
Rede bei der Grundsteinlegung d. Luth. Kirche, zu Manayunk. 



84 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER AN ISM.' 

Rev. J. Albach : 
Translation of Meurer's Life of Luther. 

Rev. H. L. Dox : 
Sermon on the True Foundation. 

The following ministers have contributed sermons to the 
Lutheran Preacher : 

D. F. Schaeffer, D. D., Rev. Dr. Miller. Rev. Dr. Hazelius, 
Rev. S. A. Mealy, Dr. G. A. Lintner, Dr. Baugher, W. D. Stro- 
bel, D. D., Rev. T. Lape, Rev. L. Eichelberger, Rev. F. W. 
Geissenhainer, Jr., Rev. J. Medtart, Rev. C. Weyl, C. F. 
Schaeffer, D. D., Rev. J. C. Hope, J. G. Schmucker, D. D. 

Contributors to the Lutheran Pulpit : 

Rev. C. A. Smith, editor, Rev. D. Eyster, Rev. T. Lape, 
Rev. Edward Meyer, F. W. Geissenhainer, Jr., H. J. Smith, 
D. D., Rev. Dr. Miller, Rev. R. Weiser, Rev. W. D. Strobel, 
Rev. Dr. C. P. Krauth, Rev. Dr. A. Wackerhagen, Rev. J. 
Berger, Rev. S. A. Mealy, Rev. Dr. G. A. Lintner, Rev. L. 
Eichelberger, Rev. C. B. Thuemmel. 

Note E. to page 64. 

calvin's opinion of confession as formerly practised by some Protestants. 

Having no copy of the Translation of the Institutes at 
hand, we render the following extract from the original 
Latin, (Tholuck's edition, Pt. 1, p. 411, 412,) that our read- 
ers may have access to the opinion of this truly great and 
illustrious divine. " The Scriptures, moreover, (says Cal- 
vin,) approve of two kinds of private confession. The one, 
which is made for our own benefit, is referred to by James, 
(James v. 16,) in the declaration that we should " confess 
our sins one to another ; for he supposes that by disclosing 
our infirmities one to another, we shall be profited by mu- 
tual advice and consolation. The other is that, which is to 
be performed for the sake of our neighbor, for the purpose 
of appeasing him, and reconciling him to us, if he has in 
any way been injured by our fault. In the former kind of 
confession, although St. James, by not specifying any one, 
into whose bosom we should unburden ourselves, has left 
us unrestricted choice to make our confession to any one in 
the whole church, whom we regard as most suitable ; yet, 
as ministers must be considered much more appropriate 
than others, we ought especially to select them. I affirm, 



PORTRAITURE OF LTJ THE R A Nl-SM . 85 

that they are better adapted to this work than others, be- 
cause, by their very call to the ministry, they are pointed 
out to us by God as the persons, by whom we are to be 
taught how to correct and subdue our sins, that we may 
derive comfort from the confident expectation of pardon." — 
"Therefore, every believer should remember, that, if he 
be so troubled in mind, and distressed by a sense of his 
sins, that he cannot extricate himself without the aid of 
others, it is his duty not to neglect the remedy, which the 
Lord offers to him ; but for the purpose of obtaining relief, 
to avail himself of private confession to his pastor, and in 
procuring consolation privately to solicit the aid of him, 
whose office it is both publicly and privately to comfort the 
people of God with the truths of the gospel." "Moreover, 
that the flock present themselves to their shepherd, as often 
as they desire to partake of the Holy Supper, I am so far 
from objecting to, that I very much desire that this should 
be done everywhere. For both those who are straightened 
in conscience may obtain great advantage from it, and those 
who ought to be admonished, thus afford an opportunity 
for admonition; but all superstition and coercion must ever 
be avoided." 



Note H. to page 66. 

on luther's Calvinism. 

As this is a subject on which it is easy to err, and on 
which men of Christian spirit and learning have entertained 
different opinions, it may be useful to devote a few moments 
to its elucidation. It is of no use here to quote passages 
from Luther's works teaching the doctrine, Luther's for- 
mer adhesion to the Augustinian view of this subject is 
admitted. In reply to the passages so often appealed to 
from Luther's work to Erasmus, which was written in the 
earlier part of his life, about twenty-one years before his 
death, when he had not yet laid off many of the Romish 
and Augustinian opinions which he subsequently rejected, 
we might present hundreds of passages teaching and im- 
plying the contrary opinion. We present a single specimen, 
carefully translated by us, from Walch's edition (the best) 
of Luther on the Galatians. We select this that those who 
nave the old English translation of this excellent work, may 



86 PORTRAITURE OF LUTHER ANIS M . 

compare it, and see how uncertain a guide such translations 
are on disputed points. "And all the prophets foresaw in 
Spirit, that Christ would be the greatest sinner, whose like 
never appeared on earth. For as he is made a sacrifice for 
the sins of the whole world, he is not an innocent person 
and without sin, is not the Son of God in his glory, but he 
is a sinner for a season, forsaken of God. Psalm viii. 6. 
He bears the sin of St. Paul, who was a blasphemer, a per- 
secutor and injurious ; of St. Peter, who denied Christ ; and 
of David, who was an adulterer and a murderer, and caused 
the name of the Lord to be blasphemed among the Gentiles. 
In short, he is the person who hath taken upon himself, and 
'bears in his own body all the sins of all men in the whole 
world, who ever have lived, are now living, or who shall 
hereafter live ; not as if he had himself committed those sins, 
but being committed by us, he took them on his own body, 
in order to make an atonement for them with his own 
blood "* We might refer the reader to a work entitled 
"Lutherus Lutheranus," of 700 pages, 8vo, consisting en- 
tirely of extracts from his works, showing that on all the 
distinguishing points between Calvinists and Lutherans, Lu- 
ther occupied the ground subsequently maintained by his 
followers. But obviously, even this would not settle the 
point. The only impartial and decisive course is to exam- 
ine all his works, and also all his correspondence, accord- 
ing to their date, and trace the gradual change in his 
opinions. This, according to the unanimous testimony of 
all Germany, no man has ever done more impartially than 
the celebrated Dr. Plank, Professor of Theology at Gottin- 
gen ; in the preparation of his invaluable work, entitled, 
' ' History of the Rise, Changes, and Formation of our Pro- 
testant System of Doctrines, from the commencement of the 
Reformation till the Introduction of the form of Concord. 
(1580.) The entire impartiality and great ability of this 
work, which cost the author twenty years of labor and in- 
vestigation, are conceded by all parties. The result, of his 
examination may be seen in the following valuable quota- 
tion, which, whilst it fully sustains the positions of this dis- 

* See WalcVs edition of Luther on the Galatians, p. 276. " In siimma, 
er ist die Person die an ihrem Leibe tragt, und auf sich geladen hat alle 
Sunden alter menschen in der ganzen Welt, die da gewesen noch sind, 
und scvn warden.' • See also the common English version, p. 254. 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 87 

course, also renders it intelligible, how such a diversity of 
sentiment might naturally exist on this subject. "Never- 
theless, the Lutheran divines did not, for a long time, see 
proper to take any notice of it, (viz : of the prominence and 
full development given to this doctrine by Calvin, and of 
its introduction into the Swiss churches;) and even the 
zealots of Lower Saxony, who had taken occasion from the 
Geneva ' Consensus,' to renew the contest concerning the 
Lord's supper, observed a perfect silence on this incalcula- 
bly more important doctrine, although Calvin appeared to 
urge them the more explicitly to its adoption. Melanchthon 
alone declared to him, that although he would not quarrel 
with him about it, he would never consent to adopt his 
(Calvin's) views on predestination.* But the silence of 
the other Lutheran divines on this subject, although it might 
appear to have been the result of indifference, was owing 
to a very satisfactory reason, of which the greater part of 
them were well aware. It cannot be denied, that the Au- 
gustinian theory of predestination had already been for- 
saken by the Lutheran church. Yet her divines could not 
but feel, that they had changed their ground. The fact 
could not be concealed, that Luther had once embraced this 
doctrine in its full rigor, and even zealously defended it 
against Erasmus, and that his early adherents, including 
even Melancthon himself, had at first done the same. It is 
indeed true, they could prove that the doctrine was not long 
retained, and thai Luther himself had abandoned it!' But 
even this concession would give an advantage to an oppo- 
nent in this dispute, which they were utterly unwilling to 
concede to Calvin. They therefore determined, rather not 
to dispute with him on this subject at all. But there was 
another reason, which probably aided in causing them to- 
keep silence on this subject. The greater part of Lutheran 
divines had, like Luther himself, receded from the Augus- 
tinian theory of predestination, very probably without them- 
selves being fully aware how this result had been brought 
about. They found themselves removed from it, before 
they had wished to be ; and it was Melancthon, and no one 
else, who had produced the change. In the first improved 

* Melancthon did not even answer the first letter of Calvin, in which 
he requested his assent to the doctrine. See Calvin's enist., p. 133, 153. 



88 PORTEAITUEE OF LUTHER ANISM. 

edition of his Loci Theologici, and doubtless still earlier in 
his oral lectures, he had proposed a theory, which, both in 
its principles and consequences, was in direct contradiction 
to the Augustinian view. This contradiction, which Me- 
lancthon himself took no pains to bring to light, was how- 
ever, at first, not generally perceived. Hence several of 
the principles of his new theory were adopted with the less 
apprehension, especially as each one of them, considered 
by itself, appeared to be incontestibly true, both according 
to reason and Scripture. Thus his cardinal ideas of the 
divine election of all men in Christ, of the universality of 
divine grace, of the extension of the atonement and merits 
of Christ to all men, had been embraced by nearly all the 
divines of their party, and by Luther himself, before they 
perceived that their views of an absolute decree of God, 
and the Augustinian doctrine of predestination, were utterly 
irreconcileable with them. But, when at last they made 
the discovery, they found their position in several respects 
an embarrassing one, and were unable immediately to ex- 
tricate themselves. They felt unwilling, not only so sud- 
denly to abandon a doctrine which they had professed, but 
even to abandon it at all. They were conscious that Au- 
gustin's doctrine of predestination appeared to be insepa- 
rably connected with some other parts of his system, such as 
the total inability of man to do any thing good,, which they 
were firmly determined never to relinquish. On the other 
hand, they were just as anxious to retain the features of 
Melancthon's theory, which they had adopted; and were 
therefore brought into a dilemma, which they could not but 
feel. The greater part of their divines now adhered to the 
view of Melancthon, that God desires and strives to bestow 
salvation on all men in and through Christ, from which it 
necessarily followed, that his decree concerning the destiny 
of each individual could not be absolute. But they, at the 
same time, retained the opinion of Augustine, that depraved 
man can do nothing at all in the work of his salvation, can- 
not exert even the feeblest effort of his will ; which seemed 
just as necessarily to imply that the salvation or damnation 
of each individual, could be decided only by an absolute 
decree of God. Some of them probably had an impression, 
that there must be some method of avoiding the last men- 
tioned inference : but their views were indistinct, Hence it 



PORTRAITURE OF LUTHERANISM. 89 

happened, that during the Synergistic controversies some of 
them again embraced the Augustinian theory in full. The 
greater part of them, however, believed that all they wanted 
was a more systematic adjustment and connexion of the 
opinions they entertained, and this conviction was undoubt- 
edly the principal reason for that caution, with which, in 
direct opposition to the polemic spirit of that age, they 
evaded a controversy on this subject. It was, therefore, 
not until 1561, that a formal dispute on this subject occurred 
between the Lutheran and Calvinistic divines, the occasion 
of which was the celebrated Zanchius, at that time profes- 
sor of theology at Strasburg." Here, then, is a correct 
and impartial statement of the facts in the case, which 
never has been, and never can be successfully controverted. 
8a 



III. DISCOURSE. 

PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LTJTHERANISM. 



Respected Auditors, 

We congratulate you oil the formation of the Historical 
Society of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in our country, 
as an event of no small significance in itself, and destined 
by Providence to exert a salutary and enduring influence on 
our portion of the Redeemer's kingdom. History is the great 
storehouse of human experience. Without it each individual 
can profit only by the observations of his own threescore 
years and ten ; but with it he can lift the veil of past gener- 
ations and draw wisdom from the incidents of thousands of 
years. All that is valuable in physics, in philosophy, and 
in religion, is thus made tributary to our improvement. It 
is therefore not without ground that Dionysius, of Halicar- 
nassus, even as early as the age of Augustus, describes 
history as philosophy teaching by examples. But when 
applied to the church of God, and viewed in connexion 
with the inspired oracles, history assumes a new aspect, 
and maybe styled "religion, teaching by examples" And 
has Christ, as perpetual Head of the church, promised to 
abide with her even to the end of the world ? Is the tui- 
tion of the Comforter, the Holy Ghost, the privilege of 
God's people in every age ? Then may we regard the his- 
tory of any branch of Christ's church, viewed in the light 
of God's word, and studied under the guidance of the Holy 
Spirit, as inculcating the continued and progressive instruc- 
tions of the Saviour to his followers. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERAIISM. 91 

History, impartially and pragmatically studied, is there- 
fore the best test of the influence of different measures, in 
reference to points not determined in the inspired statute- 
book. Such points are the proper degree and kind of 
ministerial training desirable in any age, the most successful 
method of preaching the gospel, whether with or without 
notes, and of conducting the several parts of public worship, 
of prayer with or without liturgies, the effects of different 
modes of church -government, the practical influence of 
different systems of doctrine, the best method of conducting 
revivals and of promoting the spiritual interests of the 
church, and topics of a similar nature. If, then, church- 
history be so rich in various instruction, a society designed 
to preserve and cultivate any portion of that history must 
be an interesting phenomenon, and may, if rightly conduct- 
ed, become highly important, especially in our age of rad- 
ical inquiry, and in our land of constitutional divorce between 
church and state. 

Of the American church, in all her branches, it may 
emphatically be affirmed, that she is in a transition state. 
Our country itself is yet in its nascent era. With few ex- 
ceptions, the principal churches of our land have been 
transplanted from countries where they were connected with 
the civil government. Such was the case with the Luther- 
an, the Presbyterian, the German Reformed, the Dutch. 
Reformed, the Episcopal and the Papal. All these, except 
the last, have thrown off all allegiance to foreign powers. 
Released from the oppressive embrace of civil rulers, the 
American church, in all her Protestant branches, is left to 
breathe freely, and to adopt such rules of selfgovernment 
as from time to time command her conscientious judgment. 

Perhaps an extensive induction of facts would show it to 
be an established law of God's mediatorial kingdom, that 
the church untrammelled by the state, is seldom or never 
entirely stationary. Indeed, even when controlled by the 
political government, she has been stationary only in her 
external forms and rites. The life of godliness in her min- 
isters and members has been subject to frequent fluctuations. 
Of this the history of the Lutheran, the Reformed, the 
Episcopal and the Presbyterian churches in Europe, afford 
striking examples. ISTor have the different churches in this 
new world been exempt from similar fluctuations, both in- 



9£ PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

ternal and external. As the Presbyterian church was orig- 
inally constituted by two co-ordinate Synods, subsequently 
united into one General Assembly, and then after the lapse 
of years again divided into two General Assemblies, — di- 
vided also in the days of Whitefield and the Tennants into 
old and new lights; — and as the Episcopal church was 
originally organized into separate and independent dioceses 
without any connection between them, subsequently united 
into a General Convention, and is now agitated by the Semi- 
Romish or rather Pene-Romish errors of Puseyism; — so 
also the Lutheran church at first existed in separate church- 
es, before the Synod of Pennsylvania was formed, and 
afterwards in separate and independent Synods, until the 
General Synod was established in 1820, in which the major 
part of the Synods is already united. So also has she 
fluctuated in zeal and enterprize, and will, in. common with 
her sister churches, continue to do so. The state of the 
church in any particular age, is ordinarily in some degree 
the result of gradual development under the various influ- 
ences in which she is placed, and in which the gospel is 
called to act on the minds of her members. Whilst, there- 
fore, the truths of the bible remain unchanged, and the 
fundamental attributes of piety and prosperity in a church, 
are the same in every age ; variations in collateral circum- 
stances and customs naturally will and must occur. We 
conclude accordingly, that the efforts of some ultra Lutherans 
in our Fatherland, to roll back the wheels of time about 
three hundred years, and to bring the Lutheran church to 
the standpoint of the 16th century, is no less unphilosoph- 
ical than anachronistic, and like the similar efforts of a few 
European brethren in our American church, necessarily 
must and ought to meet with signal defeat. 

The present is an era of improvement in the American 
church in general, and our branch of it in particular. As 
one amongst many pleasing evidences, may we not refer to 
the formation of that association under whose provisions we 
are now convened ? In selecting a subject for this occasion, 
I had first fixed upon the general history of the earliest, the 
colonial era of our history in this country. But having 
received the promise of several valuable documents at a 
future day, I resolved to change the subject, and have 
selected as my theme : 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHER ANISM. 93 

The Fathers op the Americo-Lutheran church, the 
enlightened friends of spiritual religion, and of scrip- 
tural religious revival. 

The grand design of all religion and of all christian church 
organizations, is to glorify God by promoting the sanctifi- 
cation of the church, and her preparation for heaven. Did 
not the Saviour give himself for us that he might redeem 
us from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, 
zealous of good works ? This peculiar people is his church. 
The association is represented as embodying in it, ' ' those 
that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints ;' n 
Cl who are children of God by faith in Christ Jesus ;" 2 " those 
whom he designs to sanctify and cleanse, that he might pre- 
sent them to himself a glorious church, not having spot or 
wrinkle or any such thing." 3 The design of the church is 
'therefore eminently spiritual, and that church, and that 
state of the church, are most prosperous, in which this de- 
sign is best accomplished. But the incessant admonitions 
of the scriptures, ''to watch," "to arise," "to return to 
our first love," "to awake out of slumber," as well as the 
experience of all ages, show a constant tendency in Chris- 
tians and Christian churches to relapse. When a church 
awakes from this state of lethargy, she improves in spirit- 
uality, and is in a state of revival; and it is in this general 
sense that we here use the term, as signifying the spiritual 
prosperity or improvement of the church, including alike 
individual and simultaneous conversions. This state of re- 
vival has been happily styled, " the- church 1 's best state," by 
a writer, whose productions the Lutheran church will cheer- 
fully acknowledge as part of her literature. This state 
should always be aimed at by the church. Then she en- 
joys the blessedness for which the Psalmist prayed: " Oh ! 
God of our salvation, wilt thou not revive us again +hat thy 
people may rejoice in thee;" and which Habakkuk im- 
plored : " Lord, revive thy work in the midst of the years, 
in the midst of the years make known ; in wrath remem- 
ber mercy." Then do individual Christians rejoice in the 
enjoyment of that divine manifestation, the temporary loss 



(1) 1 Cor. i. 1. 

(2) Gal. iii. 26. 

(3) Eph. iv. 26. 



94 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHER ANISM . 

of which Job deplored in this pathetic language : "0 that 
I were as in months past, as in the days when God pre- 
served me, when his candle shined upon my head, and when 
in his light I walked through darkness." 

In examining the patriarchs of American Lutheranism 
from the point of observation thus defined, we propose to 
inquire : 

I. What were the views of spiritual religion and 

RELIGIOUS REVIVAL, IN WHICH THESE MEN WERE EDU- 
CATED ? 

II. What was their practice amid their altered cir- 
cumstances in this western world ? 

What were the views on the subject of our theme, which 
these men had imbibed in their youth ? Not long before 
the period under consideration, the church in Germany 
had experienced a very extensive and remarkable change. 
That spirit of indomitable adherence to every item of what 
we regard as truth, and of polemic zeal in its defence, 
which were necessary to make the reformers equal to the 
trials of their day, was not easily laid aside after the ne- 
cessity in which it had originated had passed away. It 
was transmitted to successive generations, and contributed, 
in connexion with other causes, to impress a peculiarly po- 
lemic character on the German churches throughout their 
history. 

But whilst the fathers of our Lutheran Zion were grow- 
ing up, the church in their native land, was enjoying a 
glorious state of revival. The dead formality of the 17th 
century had been broken up by the influence of Spener and 
his coadjutors. This effect was chiefly due to their practi- 
cal and biblical preaching, to Spener's various publications, 
especially his Pia Desideria, and his Spiritual Priesthood 
of the Laity ; as also to his Collegia pietatis, or private bib- 
lical prayer-meetings, in which after a lecture by the pas- 
tor on some part of scripture, any male member present 
was permitted to address the meeting on the same subject, 
decently and in order. 1 By all these means, soon employed 
by numerous other pastors, a great and extensive reforma- 
tion, or revival of spiritual religion, was effected in the 

(1) "Walch's Streitigkeiten &c. p. 560. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 95 

church in Germany. The influence of Franke, and the 
establishment of the orphan-house and theological school at 
Halle, gave rapid and general extension to this reform, and 
supplied a large part of Germany with pious and practical 
preachers. Listen to the testimony of Franke, the elder, 
himself, even in his own life-time : " Many thousands of 
souls have been wakened up to true repentance ; yes, many 
thousands of ministers have been awakened." l 

In the discussions of the so called Pietistic Controversies, 
these men exploded the old notion of adiaphoristic actions, 
or actions, which though not good, were said by their op- 
ponents also not to be sinful; such, forsooth, as dancing, 
attending the theatre, playing cards, &c.; 2 and gave cur- 
rency to the only view, which can satisfy a spiritually en- 
lightened mind, namely, that every action, word and thought 
is embraced in the divine law, and is either sinful or holy. 
They also vindicated the necessity of regeneration and true 
piety to the minister of the gospel, the necessity of a better 
observance of the Christian Sabbath, and the spiritual priest- 
hood of all Christians, that is, their duty to labor for the 
kingdom of Christ. These views, which fall little if any 
thing short of our ideas of true piety and ministerial fidelity 
at the present day, were generally received by the evangel- 
ical party in Germany in the time of Franke and his suc- 
cessors ; and it was from them that these views were imbibed 
by the fathers of our church at Halle. Indeed, Muhlen- 
berg himself was called to his work by Franke the younger. 

Of the deep-rooted and formidable opposition to this 
great moral regeneration of the church in Germany, the 
pietistic controversies, and the hundreds of publications con- 
cerning them, and even the edicts of civil rulers bear ample 
testimony. Yet those holy men maintained their ground, 
and yielded not an iota of what they regarded as the truth 
of God. With such examples before their eyes, were such 
men as Muhlenberg, Brunholtz, Handschuh, Schultz, Bager, 
Krug. Kunze and others educated : and as several of them 
had labored for a season as teachers in the school at Halle, 
it was but natural to expect that in pursuing their convic- 

(1) Paroenetic. Prelect. VIII, pt. 4 ; and Guericke's Kirehengeschichte, 
p. 865. 

(2) Guericke's Kirchengeschichte, p. 875. 



96 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

tions of duty in this western world, their course would be 
substantially the same. 

II. We are thus conducted to the second topic of our 
inquiry : 

What was their practice amid their altered circum- 
stances IN THIS western world ? 

When they arrived in this country, they found the public 
attention much excited on the subject of religion. White- 
field had arrived here four years before Muhlenberg, and 
was electrifying our different cities and towns by his apos- 
tolic eloquence \ the pietistic influence h.ad reached Eng- 
land, and Wesley, after having spent two years in our 
Southern States, had returned to England, and there com- 
menced his indefatigable labors and wonderful enterprises, 
which excited attention even on this side the At 1 antic. 
Muhlenberg and their coadjutors were animated by a simi- 
lar spirit, and tasked their utmost powers for the further- 
ance of the gospel among their German brethren. White- 
field, Tennant, and the fathers of our church, held each 
other in high and mutual esteem. They cultivated each 
other's acquaintance, and preached for each other. Of 
Tennant, Mr. Handschuh thus expresses himself in his 
diary: "May 17th, 1748. This afternoon, the Rev. Mr. 
Tennant, a Presbyterian minister, visited us, who is much 
beloved by us. -Our conversations were edifying, agreeable 
and affectionate. To our great gratification and edification, 
he tarried with us till late at night/' 2 The estimate which 
Whitefield placed upon their character, is evinced by his 
personal efforts in taking collections in aid of our brethren 
in South Carolina, and his preaching for Muhlenberg in 
Philadelphia ; as also by the fact, that, at the death of the 
pious Handschuh, though unable from sickness to walk in 
the funeral procession, he had himself conveyed alongside 
of it in his carriage. Hear from the lips of Muhlenberg 
himself, an account of that solemn event, which is interest- 
ing also as showing the general estimation in which the fa- 
thers of our church were held by the public in this great 
city, at that time however containing a population of only 
15,000 souls, with seven churches, viz : a Swedish Lutheran, 



(1) Hallisclie Nachxichten, p, 1.04. 



PATRIARCHS OP AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 97 

an Episcopal, a Presbyterian, a Baptist, a Moravian, and 
a Romish church, together with the meeting-house of 
the Society of Friends. 1 " It was Thursday, October 11th, 
1764. At 1 o'clock, P. M.," says Muhlenberg, "eight bells 
were rung on the high church, and three on the cupola of our 
school-house, in memory of the deceased, which produced 
considerable sensation in the city. At 2 o'clock the teach- 
ers and ministers assembled in the conference room, in the 
school-house. Two Doctors of Divinity, two Professors 
from the English Academy, three ministers of the Episco- 
pal church, two Presbyterian ministers, one Baptist, one 
Swedish Lutheran, and two German Reformed ministers, 
were in attendance, as also Whitefield, with his faithful com- 
panion, Mr. Wright, who accompanied him from England. 
Therewith the Rev. Hartwick, Voigt and myself, constituted 
'the clerical attendants, and all walked before the corpse ex- 
cept Mr. Voigt and myself, who, together with the widow 
and children, followed the coffin as mourners. Then came 
the English physician, the church council, after which 
the citizens of different denominations followed in proces- 
sion. When we arrived at the church, a great number of 
persons had entered through the windows, for the doors 
were yet locked. The church was soon so crowded that 
we were apprehensive the galleries might break down, and 
many persons be killed or wounded." 2 It seems evident, 
therefore, that the framers of the Americo-Lutheran church 
were in habits of cordial intercourse with Whitefield and 
Tennant, the two most active revival preachers of that day 
in our whole country ; and no man acquainted with their 
reports to Halle, made during many years, will doubt that 
their whole ministry was conducted in the same devotional 
and fervid spirit. 

What was the condition of the Lutheran church at the 
time of their arrival ? Let Muhlenberg himself be our 
informant. In his diary of 1763, about a year after he 
reached his field of labor, he says : "It seems as if this 
were the time in which God will visit us with special 
gracious influences. And indeed it is high time. If our 
poor Lutherans had been neglected a few years longer, 



(1) Heinsius KircheLgeschichte, p. 685. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 1166-7. 

9 



98 PATRIARCHS OP AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

they would have been scattered altogether, and relapsed 
into heathenism. There are, moreover, almost number- 
less sects, opinions and temptations. Nor is there any 
lack of atheists, deists, naturalists and free-masons. In 
short, it seems as if there were not a sect in the world, 
which is not fostered here. There are people assembled 
here from nearly all parts of the world. What would not 
be tolerated in Europe, finds full scope here. The most 
scandalous things against God, and his word, are freely 
and publicly uttered here. Throughout the whole land 
there are many thousands, who were baptized and confirmed 
as Lutherans, but are now scattered abroad and neglect 
religion. Such is the lamentable condition and religious de- 
cline amongst our own poor Lutherans, that tears of blood 
could not sufficiently deplore it. Parents in many cases 
suffered their children to grow up unbaptized, without in- 
struction, and to run into heathenism. The great mass of 
them are yet wild, and it may easily be supposed, that one 
year will not suffice to root out the disorder and confusion 
which crept into the people in thirty. 1 And what was the 
course by which they hoped to remedy these disorders, to 
promote spirituality in religion, and to build up the king- 
dom of the Redeemer, among the lost sheep of the German 
fold ? The amplest investigation will prove, that they pur- 
sued the good old gospel plan. They preached the word 
with great zeal and fidelity, in season and out of season, 
publicly and from house to house. They administered the 
sacraments with great solemnity, and in all their pastoral 
duties throughout the week, they watched for souls as those 
that must give an account. In short, they belonged to the 
most zealous and faithful preachers of the pietistic school, 
of Spener and Franke, in the land of our fathers, and mod- 
ified their ministrations to suit the altered circumstances of 
our country. In Germany the pietistic reform was ham- 
pered by civil interference. Here in Pennsylvania, the 
union of church and state was happily abolished, even prior 
to our independence of Great Britain. For the enlightened 
and benevolent William Penn at once proclaimed universal 
tolerance for all religions. Thus did our fathers find them- 
selves free to follow the dictates of their own conscience in 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 17. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 99 

the forms of worship, government and discipline. And 
what was their practice ? 

1. They proved themselves friends of spiritual religion 
and religious revival by their diligence and faithfulness in 
preaching. They stood up, not as philosophers to publish 
the speculations of Plato or Aristotle, of their own far- 
famed Leibnitz or of Locke, but as ministers of the New 
Testament, to preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stum- 
bling block, and foolishness to the Greeks. This duty they 
performed, not as hirelings, glad when their day's work 
was over; but like the primitive apostles before them, 
" daily in the temple and in every house, they ceased not 
to teach and to preach Jesus Christ." The manner in 
which they preached, may be aptly learned from a minute 
of a Pastoral Conference, held at the house of Mr. Muhlen- 
berg, Oct. 20th, 1760, in which the question, "What is the 
best method of preaching," was fully and freely discussed. 
There were present, Dr. Muhlenberg, Provost Wrangel, of 
the Swedish Lutheran church, Rev. Wm. Kurtz, Jr., Rev. 
Gerock, of Lancaster, Rev. Nicholas Kurtz, of Tulpehocken, 
Rev. Hansile, of Reading, Rev. Weio-and, of New York, 
and Bryzelius, of the Swedish Lutheran church. Rev. 
Wrangel, being requested to present his views, said, "it 
was his habit to take a portion of the New Testament, and 
to discuss it analytically, exegetically, and by way of ap- 
plication." His sermons are carefully premeditated, and 
usually of three quarters of an hour's length. Afterwards 
he questions his hearers in order to learn what they retain 
of the sermon, "and," says Muhlenberg, "show them the 
nervum probandi of the texts adduced, and how to make a 
suitable application of them to themselves." Another pas- 
tor, says Muhlenberg, in a country station, (probably he 
meant himself, ) pursues nearly the same course, first preach- . 
ing, and then recapitulating the discourse by question and 
answer. "In our discourses," said this pastor, "we ought 
to make no ostentatious display of learning, but study sim- 
plicity ; we should neither strike into the air, nor employ 
low and vulgar expressions, not introduce too much matter 
into a sermon, but discuss the subject fully, and apply it to 
the heart. Our sermons should not be dry, but practical. 
Religion should be presented not as a burden but as a plea- 
sure. Avoid personalities. Let personal difficulties be set-- 



100 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

tied in your pastoral visits. The elenchus must not be neg- 
lected. Present your thesis rightly ; neglect not the anti- 
thesis. As our members are resident among all kinds of 
hostile errorists, controversies cannot be avoided, yet you 
should not mention names. Carefully inquire into the mo- 
ral condition, of the members of the church, and let it 
serve as a homiletic rule for you. Let us sow with tears, 
let us aim at the edification of each individual soul, and 
give heed to ourselves and cur doctrine." ' Certainly, we 
seldom find more homiletic wisdom compressed into so small 
a compass. The custom of examining the congregation on 
the principal topics of the sermon, also led to the practice, 
then prevalent, of the hearers taking their bibles into the 
church, and, during the sermon, referring to the passage 
quoted by the preacher. 2 Nor ought the moderate length 
of Dr. Wrangel's sermons be forgotten by those who often 
lose sight of Luther's maxim, that "one of the cardinal 
excellences of a preacher is to know when to leave off." 

ISTor did these holy men shun to expose the fashionable 
vices of the day. They seem to have felt the truth of 
Paul's maxim: "If ye yet seek to please men, ye are no 
longer the servants of Christ." So faithfully, did Dr. Kunze 
direct the artillery of the pulpit against the vice of Sabbath 
breaking, then as now specially prevalent among European 
Germans, that they became greatly excited, and published 
some abusive articles against him in the English newspa- 
pers, the German editor wisely declining to insert such ar- 
ticles. Like Paul these devoted servants of Christ seem 
"to have kept back nothing that was profitable," and could 
say, "we are pure from the blood of all men, for we have 
not shunned to declare the whole counsel of God." 

Muhlenberg availed himself of various suitable expedi- 
ents, some of which might be called new measures, to ar- 
rest the attention of the hearer. "A young man," says 
he, between twenty and thirty years of age, has frequently 
visited me and engaged in edifying conversation and prayer. 
He told me that he had been awakened to seek his salva- 
tion in Christ, by impressive evangelical hymns. It is in 
my custom (he added,) occasionally after sermon to read 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 859, 860-. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 624. 



f 
PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 101 

a stirring and edifying hymn adapted to the discourse, to 
expound several of its phrases, and to recommerd these 
hymns to my hearers. Nor has the practice been unblessed, 
for the audience more easily understand such representa- 
tions, and often wonder, that they have sung these hymns 
a hundred times without having understood their force and 
beauty. 1 

The subjects of their discourses were generally of tbe 
most practical kind. Of them could not be affirmed what 
the celebrated author of the Night Thoughts said of the 
Episcopal ministers of England : 

How oft when Paul has served us with a text, 
Has Plato, Tully, Epictetus preached 1 

Not only their subjects, but the whole character of their 
preaching was eminently practical and biblical, as their dia- 
ries abundantly prove. May 24, 1752. "This forenoon," 
says Muhlenberg, "I preached at Hackinsock on regenera- 
tion, and this afternoon on the conversion of Cornelius, the 
centurion. The crowd was so great, that not half of it 
could gain admittance to the church. The others drove 
their vehicles near the windows of the church, and stand- 
ing in numbers on them, listened to the sermon." On the 
25th, he catechised the young, and on the 26th preached 
again at the same place. I cannot forbear to call the spe- 
cial attention of this audience to the record of that day's 
labor. "This morning," says he, "I preached in the Low 
Dutch, on John vii. 38, and the hearers received the word 
with great avidity amid many tears. In the afternoon, I 
preached English, because a number of English families 
reside here and have no preacher. They offered to unite 
with our church, if I would remain and preach for them." 2 
Happy would it have been not only for the Lutheran church 
as such, but for the souls of thousands and tens of thous- 
ands, descended from the Germans of that day, had the 
other ministers of our church imitated the example of Muh- 
lenberg, in cultivating an acquaintance with the English 
language, or had they at least trained young men for this 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 204. 

(2) Hallische Kachrichten, p. 488,. 

9a 



102 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM, 

work, and thus furnished the rising generation with the 
ordinances of God's house in a language they could under- 
stand. Instead of five or six Lutheran churches in this 
city, we should doubtless now have at least twenty, and 
thousands of the young, who, suspended between attach- 
ment to the church of their fathers on one hand, and their 
better acquaintance with the language of the land on the 
other, never attached themselves to any church, would pro- 
bably have been saved from entering eternity in that un- 
blessed state, unsheltered by the covenant of God's people. 
But, excepting Dr's. Muhlenberg and Kunze, we are not 
aware that any of the others attempted to preach in the 
English language. Dr. Hellmuth at one time instructed 
catechumens in English, but subsequently adopted the con- 
trary course. No provision was made to train up an En- 
glish ministry. Indeed the majority of those fathers appear 
to have set themselves to work to banish the English Ian- 
guage entirely from their churches, to induce as many of 
the young as possible to learn German, and to hand over 
those who either would not or could not, to the spiritual 
care of any English denomination, into whose hands they 
might fall. In their liturgy, published in 1786, they have 
introduced a prayer, for which we should be hard pressed 
to find either scripture, precept or example, and which is 
not altogether unlike the use made of religion by Buona- 
parte, on a different occasion. Well knowing the power of 
early religious education, and feeling that the throne which 
he had usurped, needed some strong pillars for its support, 
that remarkable man, alike the blessing and the curse of 
Europe, summoned before him the dignitaries of the Gal- 
ilean church in 1806. He commanded them to frame a 
catechism to be taught to the children of the French nation, 
and insert into it a series of questions and answers, teach- 
ing that God by his special providence had raised up Napo- 
leon as the deliverer of France, that he had endowed him 
with extraordinary qualifications in times of great difficulty ; 
and that it was the duty of all good Christians, to honor 
him, pay tax to him, serve in his army, to pray for him as 
the instrument of God, and yield -him a cordial allegiance. 
Thus our fathers, in their liturgy, taught their churches to 
pray "that the Germans of our land might never disown 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHE RAN1SM. 103 

their ancestry, and that the German churches, and German 
schools might be perpetuated here." 1 

In regard to public worship, it is evident that their grand 
design, to convert sinners and edify saints, led them to some 
new measures, to some innovations on the customs of Ger- 
many. It appears that for about twelve years they used no 
liturgy at all in ordinary worship. After some time they 
were induced, in order to preserve uniformity in modes and 
ceremonies, to compose a liturgy for themselves. In 1754 
Muhlenberg, Brunholtz and Handschuh, in their joint report 
to Halle, say: "We found it necessary for present use, to 
compose a short directory for worship, ( Agende or Kirchen- 
ordnung) for the sake of unity (uniformity) in the ceremo- 
nies of public worship. We adapted it to the circumstances 
of our congregations, which had come from different parts 
■of Germany. We took as a basis the directory of the Ger- 
man Lutheran Church at Savoy, in London, as we had no 
other at hand." 2 If they had no other, they had not the 
Hallish liturgy, to which they had been accustomed in 
Germany ; and it follows, that during the previous twelve 
years, they probably used none, except on special occasions, 
when that of Savoy was perhaps employed. Even after this 
time we rarely find in their detailed descriptions of their 
preaching, any reference to the liturgy; except on sacra- 
mental or ordination occasions. At other times their prayers 
at public worship appear, during that period, to have been 
extemporaneous. That they studied simplicity in adopting 
set forms of the church in Germany, is evident from the 
directions given by the Synod in 1784, to the committee 
appointed to prepare and publish a hymnbook for this coun- 
try, namely, chiefly to follow the hymnbook of Halle ; but 
to omit the gospels and epistles, for the day of the Apostles, 
and for all other unusual festivals, that is, festivals observed 
by the church in Germany but not in this country. They 
reduced the festivals to those few which are now observed 
by us, Christmas, (New Year,) Good Friday, Easter, Ascen- 
sion day and Whitsunday. Their liturgy, as published in 
1786, is, as its preface informs us, longer than the forms 

(1) See p. 7 of Kirchen-Agende der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Yerein- 
igten Gemeinden in Nord America, Philadelphia, gedruckt bei Melchior 
Steiner.. in der Reesstrasse. 1786. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 675. 



104 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHEEANISM. 

previously used by them ; yet it is not as long as the one 
published by the Synod of Pennsylvania in 1819 ; nor more 
than half as large and copious as the one recently adopted 
by several Synods, and accepted by the last General Synod. 
They seem to have thought, and we think justly, that the 
formal, or stereotyped part of worship, ought to be short, 
that the time may be chiefly employed in exercises of prayer 
and preaching. That liturgy leaves it optional with the 
preacher to read the gospel or epistle of the day, or the 
portion of Sacred Scripture containing his text, and it con- 
tains no prayers whatever for any festival. The custom in 
our church in this country, as also in the Dutch Reformed 
church, has been from time immemorial, to use the liturgy 
only on synodical, sacramental, funeral and wedding occa- 
sions, excepting in the cities and a few larger towns, where 
the populace appears to look with a more favorable eye upon 
forms and ceremonies. To. this individual liberty of each 
minister, we would adhere as a fundamental principle of our 
American Church, never to be relinquished for any consid- 
eration whatever. These chastened views on the subject of 
forms in worship, go far to explain the reception given by 
these fathers, to the invitation addressed to their Synod by 
the late venerable Bishop White of this city, to unite in a 
body to the Episcopal church. That proposition was treated 
with due respect, but unhesitatingly declined, although the 
bishop explicitly offered that their Lutheran ordination 
should be acknowledged as valid. That bishop was an 
honor to his church. He had studied his bible and the 
ancient history of the church of Christ with an enlarged 
heart and enlightened views, and never dreamt of denying 
the ministerial character of his brethren in other churches, 
or of claiming divine authority of diocesan episcopacy. Of 
similar nature were the views of the most learned and dis- 
tinguished divines and scholars, even of the Episcopal church 
itself, such as Archbishop Whitgift, Dr. Willet, Bishops Bil- 
son, Morton, Jewell, Croft, and Burnet, Drs. Whitacker, 
Stillingfleet, and Hawies, Sir Peter King, and Archbishops 
Usher and Tillotson. A single quotation may suffice from 
a pamphlet of Bishop White, written principally to recom- 
mend a temporary departure from the line of episcopal 
succession, on the ground that diocesan bishops could not 
then (during the American Revolution)- be had. "JSow, 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 105 

(says he) if even those who held episcopacy to be of divine 
right, conceive the obligation to it not to be binding when 
that idea would be destructive of public worship ; much 
more must they, think so (referring to himself and others,) 
who indeed venerate and prefer that form as the most ancient 
and eligible ; but without any idea of divine right in the case. 
This the author (viz. Bishop White, ) believes to be the sen- 
timent of the. great body of Episcopalians in America, in 
which respect, they have in their favor unquestionably the 
sense of the Church of England, and, as he believes, the 
opinions of her most distinguished prelates for piety, virtue 
and abilities." With this manly and truthful acknowledg- 
ment, how ludicrously does the sentiment of the Puseyites 
and some other high -churchmen of the present day com- 
pare, who virtually unchurch all other denominations of our- 
land, except their own and their twin sister of Rome, and 
who either have, or seem to have, seriously persuaded them- 
selves, that all other ministers are but laymen, and their 
ministrations destitute of the divine seal ! 

If, then, it is asked, was their preaching spiritual, was it 
revival preaching? We, would answer, that, in the true 
and best sense of the phrase, it was, . They evidently aimed 
with the utmost sincerity and faithfulness to awaken and 
convert careless sinners, to edify the true, believer and to 
revive, to build up the church of the Redeemer. 

Yet it is worthy of note, that nowhere in any of their 
reports, so far as we know, is there any evidence of their 
ever having designedly made or allowed any disorder, or 
unnecessary noise during worship. We say designedly, 
jnade — for we are convinced, that no minister will long be 
disturbed by unnecessary noise during worship, who is 
known to disapprove of it, and who does not either tacitly 
or expressly, yield it some encouragement. We say unne- 
cessary noise : because awakened sinners did sometimes 
groan or weep audibly, and such unavoidable groans are 
far less objectionable than lifeless formality. They practised 
upon the same principle adopted by the General Synod of 
our church, that God is a God of order ; that order and not 
confusion, is the congenial element for the converting, the 
regenerating and sanctifying agency of the Holy Spirit. 

It is true, they never called out awakened sinners before 
the congregation, to be made the subjects of special prayer 



106 PATRIARCHS OP AMERICAN LU THE RANI S M. 

and special instruction, except on confirmation occasions. 
But they had enjoyed no opportunity to witness the opera- 
tion of this method, except in connexion with noise and 
confusion. Whether, if they were now living, they would 
do it is uncertain. Father Muhlenberg did, what resembles 
it. He conversed individually with his catechumens during 
his public meetings on the state of their souls. And the 
Scriptures seem to justify some method, by which the wil- 
ling convert decides on the spot, whether he will obey or 
not. Did the Saviour, or his apostles after preaching, leave 
the place without ascertaining who were willing to be their 
followers ? Our Saviour, at the close of his sermon, (Matth, 
xi. 28,) said to the weary and heavy laden, that is to the 
anxious and inquiring souls, " Come unto me and I will give 
you rest ;" but he did not say, Come to-morrow. And if 
they came to him, we cannot see. how he would give them 
rest, except by further instruction and advice as to their con- 
duct. We have so long been accustomed to a spiritual 
application of this invitation of the Saviour, that we forget 
that its primitive meaning was literal. In many other occa- 
sions, Jesus exhorts his hearers to follow him. "Sell that 
thou hast and follow me" — "if any man will serve me let 
him follow me." Acts ii. 41. After Peter had preached 
at Pentecost, and many were pricked to the heart, he ex- 
horted them to be baptized for the remission of sins. We arc 
told, "Then immediately those who received the word 
gladly, were baptized, being about three thousand." Now, 
how did the apostle know, who among his hearers re- 
ceived the word gladly, unless he gave them an invitation 
to manifest it, in some way or other ? And how could he 
oaptize them unless they came to him ? Yet this was done 
immediately and not the next day. 

2. The establishment of prayer-meet'ngs by the patriarchs 
of our American church, is another proof of their friend- 
ship to spiritual religion and scriptural religious revivals. 
The public exercises of the pulpit are such plain and uni- 
versally conceded duties of a minister, that in Protestant 
churches all practice them. Manifestations of zeal in the 
pulpit, may also be found among such as are at heart, either 
hostile ,or at least indifferent to the cause of true piety. 
Animal feeling, and the desire of popularity as public speak- 
ers, may induce some, practising on the well known rule of 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN L tJT HER AN IS M. 107 

Horace, 1 that feeling in the orator is essential to its produc- 
tion in the hearer, to yield themselves to the impulses of 
natural feeling and thus without that blamelessness required 
by Paul, or that moral virtue which both Cicero and Quin- 
tilian describe as essential requisites of true eloquence, they 
may pass for reputable preachers. But when we see the 
zealous preacher, also zealous in sustaining those less osten- 
tatious modes of worship, and means of doing good, we have 
additional reason to regard him as one of those who watch 
for souls, as those that must give an account. The mere 
formalist is averse to genuine religious excitement, because 
its regulation and improvement, make demands on his time 
and exertions. But the faithful servant of Christ rejoices to 
witness the power of the Holy Spirit moving the hearts of 
his hearers, and is ready to spend and be spent, in the 
appropriate labors of his profession. Such was the charac- 
ter of our fathers. They introduced prayer-meetings, not 
merely in the form of the Collegia pietatis, to which they had 
been accustomed in Germany, but also adopted, what to 
them were new measures. They adapted them to the 
necessities of their people, and conducted them according to 
the customs of England and this country. Their journal, 
published at Halle, specifically mentions Muhlenberg, 2 Brunn- 
holtz, Krug, Kunze, Helmuth and others, as favoring and 
holding these meetings, and we have no reason to regard 
this as a peculiarity in them. They allowed laymen to hold 
these meetings alone in the absence of the pastor. 

Like Luther, and Knox, and Spener, and Franke, and 
Wesley, they appear to have been eminently men of prayer. 
We would look in vain, even amongst the most zealous min- 
isters of any denomination at the present day, for a parallel 
to some of their specimens of abounding prayer. At the 
consecration of St. Michael's church in this city, in the year 
1748, after the name of Michael's had been given, it, the 
ministers all kneeled around the altar, and there were not 
less than six prayers offered up, viz: two in Swedish by Pro- 
vost Sandin and Rev. Nusmann, and four in German by 
Rev. Brunnholtz, Hartwick, Handschuh and Kurtz. 3 And 



(1) Si vis me flere, &c. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 915. 917. 

(3) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 569. 



108 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN L UTHE R AN I SM . 

at the consecration of the church in Germantown in 1752, 
the pious Handschuh remarks, " After the act of consecra- 
tion was performed by the Rev. Acrelius, of the Swedish 
Lutheran church, we ministers all fell upon our knees around 
the altar, and each offered up a prayer according to the cir- 
cumstances, in the following order, Muhlenberg, Kurtz, 
Schaum, Weygand, Heinzelman, Schultz, Schrenk, Raus, 
and myself." 1 

A prayer-meeting was commenced in Philadelphia, by 
Muhlenberg himself, who had held them daily on board the 
ship crossing the Atlantic, 2 and continued until the time of 
Dr. Helmuth. Another was sustained in Lancaster, con- 
ducted by the lay-members alone, of which the pastor, Dr. 
Helmuth, gives the following interesting account: ''Those 
who had learned to know the truth, meet on two or three 
evenings of the week, at different places for the purpose of 
singing, praying, reading a chapter of the Bible, and also of 
Arndt'c True Christianity. The number attending was often 
inconveniently large, amounting to from thirty to forty. 
These meetings were several times disturbed by wicked men, 
both young and old, by standing around the windows lis- 
tening, and sometimes by casting stones against the doors for 
the purpose of exciting those within to resistance. They re- 
viled them publicly on the streets, stigmatizing them as 
pietists, hypocrites, &c. 

My conduct, adds Dr. Helmuth, has also given much 
offense, in as much as I would not, and could not discourage 
such meetings. On the contrary, I loved them, and praised 
them both publicly and privately, with suitable caution against 
their abuse." 3 

It is evident, therefore, that those among us, who are most 
zealously engaged in promoting prayer-meetings, conducted 
in christian order, are the genuine old school -Lutherans, and 
if necessary we can plead the example of the fathers of our 
church in our defense. 

3. Their private pastoral labors prove them to have been 
friends of spiritual religion and of religious revival. They 
seem to have not only aimed at the conversion of sinners, in 



(1) Page 285. 

(2) Page 49. 

(3) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 1352. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHER AN ISM. 109 

their sermons and prayer-meetings, but they also faithfully 
followed up those labors by more private efforts with indi- 
vidual souls. Their journal abounds in detailed narratives 
of individual cases of experience, evincing their deep solici- 
tude for souls, and showing that, like the apostles, "they 
preached privately to those of reputation, lest they should 
have run and labored in vain." 1 Listen to an extract from 
Dr. Muhlenberg's diary, taken from multitudes almost at ran- 
dom. May 27th, 1752: "I visited Mr. , the senior 

officer of the government, whom I mentioned before. He 
professed to have been greatly encouraged by the four ser- 
mons I had preached here. We had an edifying, confidential 
conversation, and mutually encouraged each other. After- 
wards I visited a young deacon, who also appeared to be 
revived, and determined to give his whole heart to God. 
'Finally I visited the sick woman before referred to. She 
thanked me heartily that I had spoken to her concerning 
death. She had subdued all fear of her approaching end, 
and had a deep sense of her depravity, and a godly sorrow 
on account of it. She felt and acknowledged herself the very 
chief of sinners, as destitute of even the least power to help 
herself. But although her heart seemed thus bruised and 
humbled, she could not yet console herself by the merits of 
the Saviour. At her request, I prayed for her, and spread 
her wants before the Lord, and instructed her from the word 
of God." 2 

Touching a visit paid by him to the congregation in Tol- 
pehocken, he bears this pleasing testimony of the fidelity 
and success of his fellow-laborer, Rev. N. Kurtz. "After 
the preaching was over," says he, " I was informed by va- 
rious individuals, that they had been awakened from the 
sleep of sin, by the preaching of the Rev. Mr. Kurtz, and 
brought to repentance, and a hungering and thirsting after 
righteousness." 3 

One other case I cannot omit. It is from the journal of 
that venerable father in Christ, with whom in early life, I 
had yet the pleasure of personal acquaintance during several 
years, though the heat and burden of many years had im- 

(1) Gal. ii. 2. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 489. 

(3) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 229, 

10 



410 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUT-HE-R AN1S M. 

paired his intellectual as well as his bodily energies. " To 
day," says he, " I visited several sick persons, among whom 
was a naturalist, (deist.) He had travelled much in the 
world, and had been a captain in the Danish army. He 
urged the principal, customary objections to the divinity of 
Christ, and other truths of the gospel. Grace was given 
me to reply to him in a becoming, affectionate and convincing 
manner. How great was my joy, when, in the midst of my 
conversation with him, he seized my hand, and with tears in 
his eyes exclaimed, you have convinced me, dearest friend, 
you have reclaimed a wandering sheep to the Great Shep- 
herd ! He then uttered a heartfelt prayer, and with many 
tears besought the Saviour as the true God-man, and Re- 
deemer of the world, to pardon his sins. I reminded him 
of the Saviour's declaration : Whosoever heareth my say- 
ings, &c. I told him, he must persevere in prayer, through 
every difficulty, until he obtained lasting peace of mind." 1 
This convert not long after died in the hopes of the gospel, 
and Dr. Helmuth took occasion to add interest to his funeral 
discourse by a narration of his conversion, a practice, which, 
if judiciously followed, we would recommend to our younger 
brethren occasionally to pursue. 

Nor were their self-denying labors at all confined to the rich, 
or those in middling circumstances. They freely " conde- 
scended to those of low estate." The poor, yea those who 
might be emphatically styled God's poor, for they are des- 
pised by many for the skin which He gave them, we mean 
the neglected colored population, shared in the ; v faithful la- 
bors. Under date of February 15th, 1745, he states: "I 
visited a female of the Reformed church, who seems to be 
truly pious, and a colored woman, a slave, (for then, alas ! 
even Pennsylvania had slaves !) entered the room, who ap- 
peared to be a friend of true religion, and to possess an ex- 
perimental acquaintance with it. I conversed with her iri 
the English language, in order to encourage her mind." 2 
On another occasion, during his residence in the city of New 
York, he says: (July 26th, 1752.) " This forenoon I 
preached in Low-dutch on the unjust steward, and this af- 
ternoon, in German, on the words, "lam crucified to the 



(1) Hallische Nachrichten p. 1473, 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 49. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHER AN ISM. HI 

world," &c. A widow of the congregation had a mulatto 
slave, who was in the habit of attending our English and 
Low-dutch meetings, and by her consistent walk put many 
nominal christians to shame. She brought me my dinner 
from her mistress. I offered her a piece of money as a token 
of my gratitude, but she absolutely refused to take it, and 
began to weep bitterly, because she had heard that I was 
about to leave them. She said, she had experienced the 
power of the preached word in her heart, and had never be- 
fore obtained so much consolation for her soul, and now I 
was about to leave them. I must coafess my heart was ready 
to break. I admonished her to adhere closely to the Lord 
Jesus, who shed his blood for her too. After the afternoon 
sermon, three inquiring sinners visited me in my bouse, and 
desired a word of instruction. At night, I preached in the 
English lano;uao-e on the condition of the church at Laodicea, 1 
Rev. 3. In the journal of the Rev. Handschuh, also, we 
find six or ei^ht entries detailina- his faithful labors in instruct- 
ing a colored man 2 of genuine piety, and admitting him into 
the church. Noble example ! How few among us have 
done likewise ! Have not some of us been ashamed of the 
poor negro ? Or at least, have we not neglected him ? How 
few of us have remembered them that are in bonds as bound 
with them ? 

They discouraged vice in every form, as hostile to the in- 
terests of the soul. Has the cause of temperance enlisted 
ail the wise and good of our age ? Here we find temper- 
ance men before the age of temperance ; men who dis- 
couraged all use of ardent spirits a century ago. Muhlen- 
berg describing the custom which even at this day disgraces 
some enlightened neighborhoods, of giving intoxicating 
liquors as a supposed refreshment, at funerals in the country, 
dilates on its soul-destroying effects, and praises those who 
gave bread, and some innocent beverages in its stead. His 
description of rum, then a novelty, is worthy of note. He 
says : " There is a species of spirit of wine in this country, 
which is distilled from the West India sugar-cane. It pos- 
sesses a concealed, exciting, deceptive, and corrupting ten- 
dency, and can gradually enslave and ruin, the strongest 

(1) Hallisciie NackrichterL. p. 502. 

(2) Page 564—570. 



J12 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN" LUTHERANISM. 

constitution. If a person take a spoonful to-day, to-morrow 
his nature demands two, and next day three, and thus on 
until he acquires such a thirst for strong drinks, that he can 
pour in the strongest brandy like water, and still cannot slake 
his thirst. It may well be compared to the pestilence that 
walketh in darkness, and the destruction that rageth at noon- 
day, by which a thousand are slain on our side, and ten 
thousand on the other. 1 *' Yet impartiality, one of the cardi- 
nal virtues of the historian, requires us to add, that though 
a temperance man in the literal sense, and in regard to rum 
a total abstinence man, the grand idea of the present age of 
moral reform, total abstinence from all that intoxicates, 
whether vinous or distilled liquors, had not yet dawned on 
his mind. But who can doubt that if he had lived in our 
day, he would be found in the foremost ranks of thorough 
reformers ? 

That they were the ardent friends of genuine religious 
revival, is doubly evinced by the manner in which they speak 
of the special blessing, sometimes attendant on their labors. 
Says Dr. Helmuth, in 1772 : " As to the spiritual condition 
of our church, there is at present an unusually blessed state 
of revival. Aged, dead sinners have been brought to life,, 
and cried out weeping for mercy. Sinners whose case I had 
often regarded as hopeless, are powerfully affected, and many 
of them truly converted to Christ. How greatly has my 
despondent mind been cheered, and my sluggish heart been 
roused, especially during the past weeks ! I published a 
sacramental season, and in order that I might have oppor- 
tunity to probe the hearts of my dear people, I gave them 
an invitation to call on me from eight to twelve o'clock, A. 
M., every day for two weeks. I thus had an opportunity to 
converse with each one separately, and to learn the extent 
and depth of this revival in many souls, by which the labors 
of these fourteen days were greatly sweetened. Through 
occasional neglect of my meals, and through excess of speak- 
ing and concern of mind, I was very much debilitated at the 
end of this time." 2 This same father, speaking of some 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 986. See, also, p. 477, and on p. 1196, 
the case of an intemperate female ! and p. 1479, a case of delirium tremens, 
the subject of which was truly converted and remained faithful at least to. 
the date of the report in 1784. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 1344. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERAN ISM. 113 

catechumens, who were deeply impressed during his address 
to them, says : " Their hearts were so deeply moved, that 
they could not contain themselves, nor refrain from disturb- 
ing me during the services by their audible weeping." 

Dr. Kunze, one of the most learned and enlightened of 
that noble band, thus expresses himself in 1782: "Espe- 
cially," says he, " among the young in this place, a fire has 
been kindled, which to the mutual joy of my colleague, Dr. 
Hehnuth, and myself, has been burning upwards of a year." 1 
Speaking of New York 2 in 1785, to which city he had re- 
moved, he says : "By the grace of God my labors are not 
in vain. The number of souls who have been gained by the 
word, is not yet large. Several have, however, come to me 
with tears, and expressed a desire to converse with me about 
the concerns of their souls. Of more extended fruit, I have 
as yet heard only faint indications ; but that the preaching 
of the word has somewhat affected the souls of my hearers 
in general, I infer from evident proofs in the whole congre- 
gation." 

4. Their conscientious and faithful labors to train the 
rising generation in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, 
proves them the friends of genuine religion, and of reli- 
gious revivals. One of the cardinal characteristics of the 
Lutheran church, has always been her systematic provision 
for the thorough religious education of the young. In no 
other church on earth are the children more fully indoctrin- 
ated in the way in which they should go. Yet the value 
of this provision depends much upon the manner in which 
it is executed, and this depends upon the piety of the min- 
ister. It is therefore not the mere fact that catechetical 
instruction was given, and given extensively ; but the man- 
ner in which it was done, to which we appeal in proof of 
our theme. These fathers gave all due prominence to the 
practical aspects of instruction. They labored to make that 
instruction the means of conversion to those on whom it 
was bestowed. So that at the great day they might be able 
to say, "Here Lord am I, and the children thou hast given , 
me." It was customary for them to preach in the country 
stations but once a day, and immediately after the public 



(1) Hallische Nachrichteii,. p. 1423. 

(2) Page 1509. 

10a 



114 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHER ANISM, 

service, to devote an hour to the catechetical instruction of 
the young. But their diary pays the special tribute to the 
Rev. Van Buskirk, of Macunschy, that he possessed partic= 
ular excellence in this department. Sometimes they cate- 
chised the congregation on the gospel of the day. 1 The 
common book of instruction, however, was ordinarily Lu- 
ther's German Catechism. Of this valuable little manual, an 
English translation of it was made at*a very early period, 
for we find that version of Dr. Wrangel, in 1761, is called 
a new one. Another version into the Indian language had 
been executed before by Campanius, Lutheran pastor of the 
Swedes. It is worthy of remark, that even at that early 
day, the opposition of several sects to this important method 
of instruction was very strong ; and it is recorded that some 
of their enemies termed the catechism "the devil's book." 2 
No well grounded objection, however, can be made against 
the fact of catechetical instruction, though it justly may 
against the practice of some negligent pastors, who conduct 
their instruction in a careless manner, and admit their cate- 
chumens to sacramental communion without the requisite 
attainments in religious experience. Rightly conducted, the 
course of instruction preparatory to sacramental communion, 
ought not to consist mainly in reciting or explaining the cate- 
chism, which should be done in earlier years ; but principally 
in a course of lectures on practical piety, based on the cate- 
chism, explaining the rise, progress, nature, evidences of true 
conversion, and the duties of professed disciples of Christ, 
Thus conducted, it furnishes to the pious pastor, a series of 
practical meetings, giving him free access to the hearts of 
his catechumens, and enabling him to accomplish all that 
spiritual good, aimed at and doubtless often attained by 
others, under the name of class meetings or conference 
meetings, &c. After many years of experience and obser- 
vation, we regard this peculiarity of the Lutheran church 
as one of her moral glories ; and we trust no Lutheran min- 
ister will be found disparaging it. But we will let these 
fathers speak for themselves. Says Mr. Brunholtz, of Phila- 
delphia, in 1752: "I find, that my catechetical instructions 
of the young, which I have from the beginning conducted 

(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 927. 

(2) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 289. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 115 

in the church, (to which I have added another exclusively 
for children, on Friday, at my residence,) has excited a 
greater interest, not only in the youth, but also amongst 
others, than could be done by preaching alone ; because 
the people are better able to understand instruction in ques- 
tion and answer, than a didactic discourse. These Sunday 
afternoon exercises are almost as numerously attended as 
the discourses of the morning." 1 

Of the faithful manner in which Muhlenberg himself con- 
ducted the course of instruction preparatory to confirmation, 
let us hear his own testimony. "In the month of Novem- 
ber, I confirmed and admitted to the Lord's supper, the 
young people whom I had instructed in New Hanover. 
They were twenty-six in number, chiefly adults, ore of 
whom was a married man. They had committed to mem- 
ory the questions on the plan of salvation with considerable 
accuracy. I labored earnestly to impress them with the 
proper import of what they had learned, and without ceas- 
ing admonished them to frequent prayer, and to reduce to 
practice the instructions they had received. They cannot, 
therefore, plead as an excuse before God, that they have 
not been sufficiently impressed and urged. The major part 
of them have also assured me in the individual communi- 
cations I had with them, that they have often been upon 
their knees in private prayer at home, and have experienced 
in their souls the operative influence of the Spirit of God, 
through his word. At their confirmation, they renewed 
their baptismal vows, amid many tears, upon their knees, 
before God and the congregation." 2 Such was their in- 
struction, and thus conducted it can never fail to eventuate 
in blessing. 

5. That they were ardent friends of spiritual religion 
and religious revival might be proved by the various ef- 
forts they made to improve the state of discipline in their 
churches. This is indeed an all-important feature of a well 
conducted church. Even the heathen Seneca has said, 
bonis nocet, qui mails parcit, and a greater than Seneca has 
said, "Them that sin, rebuke before all, that others may 
fear." Our Saviour enjoins that after having admonished 

(1) Hallisclie Nachricliteii, p. 305. 

(2) Hallisclie Nachrichten, p. 340. 



116 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

an offending brother in private, the admonition should be 
repeated under the associate influence of two or three others. 
If he will not hear them, tell it to the church, and should 
he still refuse to hear, then esteem him as a heathen or 
publican, i. e. exclude him from Christian privileges. It 
was for this purpose that Christ gave his disciples the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven, the control of ingress and egress 
from the church, and told them that whatsoever they bound 
on earth, should be bound in heaven, and whatsoever they 
loosed on earth, should be loosed in heaven. Without this 
provision for eclecticism and self-purification, the people of 
God would not be "a peculiar people," nor would they 
long continue "zealous of good works." In Germany, as 
is well known, the unhappy union of church and state has 
entirely defeated all efforts of discipline. But Muhlenberg 
and his coadjutors saw the error, and determined to reform. 
They, in fact, on this, as on some other points, introduced a 
new measure. 

In 1762, a system of church discipline was introduced 
by the Philadelphia church, highly respectable in the stand- 
ard of Christian propriety assumed. 1 One based upon simi- 
lar principles was adopted by the church in Lancaster ; but 
Dr. Helmuth, at that time pastor, complains in 1772, of 
great difficulty in enforcing it. 2 

In 1784, it was resolved at a synodical meeting, that all 
communicants who had been guilty of licentiousness, should 
be required to make public confession of their sin, or be 
excluded from church privileges. 3 

But these fathers unhappily failed to adopt any uniform, 
general system, based upon scriptural principles. Nor did 
they print the resolutions actually adopted, for general cir- 
culation among the people. Thus they lost the influence 
which education and public sanction would have given to 
the discipline they actually adopted, and as their members 
had never been accustomed to any discipline in Germany, 
and were, therefore, peculiarly difficult to control, the dis- 
cipline was soon partially relaxed, and in course of time 
almost totally neglected. 



(1) Hallische Nachrichten, p. 963. 

(2) Page 1 345. 

(3) Page 1458. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN I>V THE R AN IS M. 117 

• 6. Finally, their synodical meetings and special confer- 
ences were conducted in such a manner, as to prove them 
the ardent friends of spiritual religion, and of religious re- 
vival. The light in which they viewed these meetings, is 
indicated by the minute made of one of them in 1760, after 
the discussion of the question, whether it is useful and ne- 
cessary that the annual meetings of the ministers and elders 
should be continued. " It is necessary (say they,) in order 
that the servants of one master and laborers in one vine- 
yard, may become acquainted with each other, may become 
more closely united in love, and in mutual consultation con- 
cerning the best interests of the church (ecclesiae- plantan- 
dae, ) and the propagation of the Christian religion. They 
are useful, in order that each individual may communicate 
the grace and gift he has received, for the common good,— 
that they may encourage, admonish, and comfort each other, 
and decide cases of conscience, — that they may make known 
to each other in love, simplicity, meekness, and humilit}', 
their personal faults of which they themselves might not be 
aware, — and remove all contention and jealousy; because 
a house divided against itself cannot stand, and harmony 
among ministers of the same denomination, (and we would 
add, of all fundamentally orthodox churches,) "makes a 
great impression upon friends and foes." x 

The zeal and brotherly love actually abounding among 
them, was such, that, during the meeting above referred to, 
whilst they regularly dismissed the congregation at a sea- 
sonable hour and retired to the residence of Dr. Muhlen^ 
berg, there to spend some time in private conference on 
experimental religion and the duties and difficulties of the 
pastoral office, they thrice continued these private consulta- 
tions and devotional exercises till long after midnight, viz. : 
on the 18th, 19th and 20th of October, 1760. 2 

As early as 1772, the practice of holding special confer- 
ences, in the interim of the synodical meetings, was com- 
menced, and their design is thus described by Dr. Helmuth : 
"A conference is to be held once every three months, to be 
attended only by those ministers who reside nearest to- 
gether, and they differ from the General Conference (the 

(1) Hallisclie Nachrichten, p. 857. 

(2) Pages 654, 855—862. 



118 PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LUTHERANISM. 

Synod,) in this, that their object is not to attend so much 
to the external affairs of the congregation, but chiefly to 
aim at edification and at improvement in brotherly love. 
The contiguous brethren in the upper part ef Pennsylvania, 
(Lancaster,) are Messrs. Kurtz, Sen'r., Kurtz, Jr., Krug, 
Wildbahn, Enderlein, Fred. Muhlenberg and myself (Hel- 
muth.) We held our first meeting in a village, called New 
Holland, and spent our time in a truly brotherly manner. 
Each brother proposed something, which tended to edifica- 
tion or instruction, and which was made the subject of 
prayer." 1 

How pleasing to find one of the most important measures 
for promoting religion, which is but now beginning to gain 
currency amongst us, we mean special conferences, sanc- 
tioned by something so much like them, in the practice of 
the illustrious pioneers and fathers of our church ! Would 
that the provisions of our Formula on this subject were 
more generally reduced to practice. Then should we wit- 
ness more frequent revivals of religion amongst us, and see 
spiritual religion more extensively prevail. 

In conclusion, we see that the spirit of our Fathers was 
a spirit of Eclecticism. They called no man master, they 
acknowledged no head but Christ ; no absolute authority 
but the Bible. They bound themselves to no set of forms 
derived from the old country, but retaining the grand land- 
marks of Lutheranism, doctrinal, practical, and liturgical, 
they adapted them to their altered circumstances in this 
country. Thus with the Bible in their hands, and their eyes 
fixed on the leadings of God's providence, they passed for- 
ward, and felt at liberty to adopt any improvement which 
was developed in the progress of society, and of the church, 
and which commended itself to reason and to scripture. 
i Thus may it ever be with our Zion ! Far. be the time, 
nay, may it never come, when the Lutheran church shall 
be robbed of her liberty for free and unshackled investiga- 
tion, or shall again be enslaved to voluminous creeds and 
detailed confessions. But with the Bible, and the brief 
doctrinal articles of the Augsburg confession, may that 
church, which is emphatically styled the church of the Re- 
formation, continue to deserve the name, and as she owes 

(1) Hallische Nadmchten, p. 1339.. 



PATRIARCHS OF AMERICAN LU T51 E R A N IS M. 119 

her existence to the Reformation, never be the enemy of 
Reformation. For the sake of substantial uniformity, let 
her have a brief liturgy, but never, never, bind the con- 
science of her ministers as to the frequency of its use. Let 
her be cautious in rejecting the old, but not prejudiced 
against all that is new. Let her try every doctrine and 
every measure by the touchstone of God's word, and what- 
ever the oracles of Jehovah sanction, and the providence 
of God blesses, let her not be ashamed to practice and 
profess. 

Then, my beloved brethren, may we hope to find our 
church ever the friend of spiritual religion and religious re- 
vival ; then may we hope to train up Christians and Chris- 
tian ministers of enlarged views, of liberal, charitable feel- 
ings, of expanded enterprises, of millenial schemes. Thus 
may we hope she will co-operate most harmoniously, and 
most efficiently with the other churches of our land, and of 
ail lands, in advancing the mediatorial reign of our blessed 
Master, and preparing the way for the second glorious com- 
ing of the Lord. 



IV. DISCOURSE 



THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S PRESENCE IN THE 
EUCHARIST. 



When the Divine Author of our holy religion, gave us an 
inspired, written record of its sacred principles, precepts and 
institutions, through the men whom he had personally in- 
structed, he also taught us to regard this record as a sufficient 
rule of faith and practice, as able to make us, individually, 
"wise unto salvation." Through these same honored instru- 
ments he informs us, "that all scripture was given by inspira- 
tion," for the express purpose, " that the man of God may be 
perfect, theroughty furnished unto every good work." To 
the close of the whole canon, that is, to the last (as we be- 
lieve) of the inspired books, the Revelation of St. John, the 
Saviour appended this solemn warning, speaking in his own 
person : "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you 
these things in the churches. If any man shall add unto these 
things, God will add unto him the plagues that are written in 
this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of 
the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of 
the tree (var. lect. for Bj/3Xjw book) of life, and out of the 
holy city, and from the things which are written in this 
book." Rev. xxii. 18, 19. 

From these solemn declarations it is evident, that God 
will hold every man to strict responsibility for the conformity 
of his religious opinions to the teachings of the inspired 
word; and, therefore, in forming our doctrinal views, we 
ought to study the utmost possible objectivity, ought to labor 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 121 

to divest ourselves of all preconceived opinions, either for 
one or other interpretation of a disputed point, and let the 
Scripture, as much as possible, be made to interpret itself. 
These remarks are peculiarly applicable to the doctrine which 
is at present to claim our attention. It has been a bone of 
contention in the Protestant church, with but little inter- 
mission, ever since its origin, until about fifty years ago, 
when the Lutheran church almost universally abandoned 
the views, which Luther and his co-laborers, with few ex- 
ceptions, entertained. We, therefore, feel the deepest ob- 
ligation, in endeavoring to investigate this subject, to be gov- 
erned entirely by the word of God, interpreted according to 
the correct principles of common sense, which is the only 
true system of Historical Exegesis. 

Let us first briefly recall to mind those principles of Her- 
meneutics, which particularly come into question in these 
passages of Scripture on this subject. 

§ 1. General Principles of Interpretation. 

1 . The general nature of language implies, that the words 
of a speaker be regarded as definite signs of his ideas, and 
that the signification of these sio-ns is conventional : that is, 
the signs or sounds called words, derive their meaning, not 
from their intrinsic structure, but from the current practice 
or usage of the people at the time they are employed. Thus, 
2wfjta signifies body, Cap! flesh, and aljaa blood, aprog bread, 
and olvog wine, simply in consequence of conventional usage. 
The few words in different languages, which express sounds 
not unlike that of the words themselves, such as roar, crash, 
&c, are, like some of the admired lines of Virgil or Homer, 
in which the sounds of the whole sentence bears some anal- 
ogy to the idea expressed, but exceptions which confirm the 
general rule. 

2. The language of Scripture and of inspiration, does not 
differ from other language in its general principles. That 
this would be the case, might a priori be expected : for if it 
were otherwise, such language would not be intelligible. As 
words in any language convey to the hearer, not whatever 
ideas the speaker may choose, but those of which conven- 
tional usage has made them the authorized exponents ; the 
inspired writers could be intelligible on no other supposition. 



122 THE NATURE OP THE SAVIOUR'S 

Accordingly, it is admitted by all enlightened exegetical 
writers, that the language of Scripture must be investigated 
on precisely the same principles which are applied to unin- 
spired language. 

The actual examination of the Scriptures a posteriori, 
proves the above expectation, or supposition to be correct. 
The diversity of style, of literary excellence, and of psycho- 
logical peculiarity, belonging to the different books, incon- 
testably establishes the homogeneity of the language of the 
Bible, with that of uninspired writers. Generally, the Scrip- 
tures have been interpreted on this supposition, by the great 
mass of christians in all ages, and found to be intelligible. 

3. The rules of Sacred Hermeneutics must therefore, 
also, like those of Hermeneutics in general, be based on 
the nature and general principles of language, and arise out 
of them. 

Thus we must study the historical import of the individual 
words employed : the context and scope of the passage must 
be investigated, the circumstances and design of the writer 
are to be examined, and in short all the light of archaeology 
is to be employed, to ascertain what ideas the passage in 
question would have conveyed to the persons of the age and 
country, to whom they were first addressed. The sense thus 
acquired is to be regarded as the true one, and is termed 
the historical sense. Luther himself, in most instances, prac- 
ticed on this system, and termed the signification thus ac- 
quired the literal sense. 

4. Experience, however, proves, that in fact, general usage 
has, in all languages, given different significations to many 
words. The causes of this fact, we will not here stop to 
discuss; its reality is undisputed, and familiar to all. 

That signification of a word, in which it is most commonly 
employed, is usually termed its natural or literal import. 
The others are called figurative. 

The figurative meanings of words are of various kinds, 
metaphysical, typical, allegorical, <fec, &c. 

5. Yet the great mass of men ordinarily employ words, in 
their natural, most obvious, and literal sense. 

Therefore, a sound rule of interpretation is, that the literal 
sense must be adhered to in the interpretation of all authors, 
sacred or profane, until reasons occur to justify us in devia- 
ting from iL 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 123 

6. Such reasons, however, often do occur both in sacred 
and profane authors, and then a deviation from the literal 
sense becomes necessary. 

These reasons are 1.) When the passage literally inter- 
preted contradicts natural reason, common sense, or the testi- 
mony of our senses. 

Thus, for example, in Psalm xviii. 2, and elsewhere, God 
is termed "a rock, & fortress, a buckler, a high tower:" 
when the Saviour says, (John xv. 1,) "I am the true vine, 
ye are the branches," — or "I am the door," x. 9 : or when 
Paul says, 1 Cor. x. 4, " That rock was Christ," or " Christ 
our passover," was slain for us, &c. ; or Matth. xiii. 38, 39, 
" The field is the world — the seed is the word, &c, the enemy 
is the devil." See also Matth. viii. 22 ; or in Gethsemane 
when Jesus says, "Father, if it be possible let this cup," 
this trial of affliction, pass away. This rule is based on the 
universally conceded proposition, that the testimony of our 
senses fairly and fully ascertained, is stronger than any other 
evidence, which might seem to overturn it ; and that the 
obvious and conceded teachings of common sense and rea- 
son are also true. 

2) We must depart from the literal sense, when the pas- 
sage literally interpreted, contradicts the well known opinions 
of the author, or in regard to the Bible, contradicts some 
other portions of Scripture, and the passage naturally, in 
accordance with the laws of language, admits another 
meaning, that does not labor under these difficulties. Thus, 
the command of the Saviour: "If thy hand, or foot, or eye 
offend thee, cut it off,, or pluck it out," &c, Matth. xviii. 9, 
10, literally interpreted contradicts the command in the 
decalogue, "thou shalt not kill," and, therefore, the literal 
sense cannot be retained. 

3) The deviation from the literal sense is the more nat- 
ural and allowable, when the composition is poetic, in which 
figurative language naturally abounds, in all languages and 
among all nations. 

4) Also, in popular discourses and even narrative com- 
positions, when the speaker is in the habit of employing 
figurative style. 

Thus, after we know from the discourses of the Saviour 
in general, that often, very often, he speaks in parables, 
and employs various kinds of figurative expressions ; it is 



124 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

the more probable, that his meaning in a disputed passage 
is figurative also ; and it is the more obligatory on us to 
adopt a tropical interpretation, when a literal one labors 
under difficulties. We need not enumerate the parables of 
the Saviour. It is well known that his discourses are more 
frequently parabolical or figurative, in some form or other, 
than literal. 

This is also very frequently the case in regular historical 
and didactic composition in all languages, although the 
figures occurring are of a more modest nature, are meta- 
phorical rather than allegorical. The tropes are rarely 
kept up through a whole narrative. 

Such a figurative mode of speaking, is more usual among 
the orientals in general, than among the other civilized 
nations. 

Having thus sketched out the general principles of her- 
meneutics, so far as they have an immediate bearing on the 
portions of Holy Writ, relating to the Supper of our Lord ; 
we proceed, in the seeond place, to their application. We 
shall inquire what is the literal import of the words of the 
institution ; whether sufficient difficulties oppress the literal 
sense to justify its rejection ; what are the several tropical 
or figurative significations, of which the words in question 
admit ; and which of these commends itself most strongly 
to our judgment and conscience, as most accordant with the 
legitimate principles of interpretation. 

§ 2. The literal sense of the words of the institution. 

What is the literal sense of the Gospel narrative of the 
institution of the Lord's Supper? Matth. xxvi. 26. (Mark 
xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 23, 24.) 

Etf$fovrwv 8s aurwv, \txf3uv o Irjrfxg' <n>v ap-rov, xai sv\oyyj(fag, 
(or according to a various reading, su^ccpiaV^Cag') sxXairs, 
xai eSidz toj<T jxa^rajg", xai slxs' Aa(3s<rs, Qaysrs' tuto Is"i 
g-u^a jxx. Literally, this means, "But whilst they were 
eating, Jesus took the bread, (or loaf,) and having offered 
prayer, or pronounced a blessing, (but not blessed it, the 
bread, "it" not being found in the Greek,) he break and 
gave to his disciples, and said, Take eat, this (bread) is my 
body (that is, is no longer bread, but is my body, and hav- 
ing been bread when I took it up, and being now my body, 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. !25 

it must have been changed from one substance into another, 
that is, it must have been transubstantiated.") We, there- 
fore, see that the Romish doctrine is really the literal, and 
only literal one. And it cannot be consistently denied, that 
if we are to disregard the testimony of the senses, and to 
suppose a miracle in the case, the doctrine of papal tran- 
substantiation is the legitimate sense of this passage. 

The same remarks and inferences are equally appropriate 
to the language of the Saviour touching the wine, as given 
by Matthew xxvi. 27-29. ILisrs i% aurou rfavrsg" tkto ycLp 
kg-~i to aT^a fxou, &c. That is, literally, Brink ye all of it, 
(out of this cup,) for this (bowl or cup) is (no longer a cup, 
but) is my blood. Hence, as it was a bowl or cup when he 
took it into his hands, and was thereafter no longer a cup,, 
but was his blood, it must have been changed from one 
'substance into another : and here again we have the papal 
transubstantiation as the legitimate and only result of the 
literal interpretation. Yet, after all, even the Papists do 
not adhere faithfully to the literal import here, as they sup- 
pose the "cup" (tforrjpiov) to be used figuratively for the, 
wine contained in it. 

This Romish interpretation is wisely rejected by the 
whole Protestant world, for the following satisfactory 
reasons : 

a) It is contradicted by the clear and indisputable testi- 
mony of our senses, which demonstrate that no change has 
taken place in the nature and properties of the bread and 
wine. We have this testimony, not of our senses only, but 
of sight, taste, smell and touch. Nor the four senses of 
one individual only, but of all men, of every generation 
and country, where the rite has been celebrated. But no 
testimony is so strong as that of the senses ; because, on it 
rests our belief even of the Scriptures. 

b) It contradicts the universal observation of mankind,, 
that all bodies (material substances) must occupy definite 
portions of spaee, and cannot be at more than one place at 
one time : for according to this interpretation, every portion 
of consecrated bread is really the whole material body of 
the Saviour ; hence the whole body is locally present in 
many different places at the same time, which is absurd. 

c) The Apostle still calls the symbols bread and wine, 
after their consecration ;. which he would not have done, i£; 

iu 



126 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

they had been transmuted into the body and blood of the 
Saviour. 1 Cor. x. 16; xi. 26. 

d) Because the bread and wine are subject to the same 
law of decomposition and corruption as if they wree not 
consecrated. 

e) Because it was a comparatively recent doctrine, un- 
known in the Christian church generally, until about a thou- 
sand years after this ordinance was instituted. 1 

§ 3. The first figurative interpretation (by Luther.) 

What is the first figurative interpretation of the words o'f 
the Institution ? 

It is that of Luther, and his coadjutors in the sixteenth 
century, retained by the great mass of the Lutheran church 
till half a century ago, from some apparent scriptural au- 
thority aided by respect for Luther, and the penalties which 
followed the rejection of a material feature of the state re- 
ligion. It amounts to this : The words of the Saviour, 
"Take, eat, raro sp to Cw^a ju,*," (take, eat, this is my 
body,) mean, "Take, eat this bread, which is not my body, 
and remains bread, but which is the outward element, in, with 
or under which my true body is truly and substantially pre- 
sent, and is distributed with the bread, and received by the 
mouth, by all communicants." 2 

(1) See the writer's Popular Theology, 5th edit. p. 296, &e, 

(2) That there may be no doubt iu the minds of those unacquainted 
with the symbolical books, as to the accuracy of our representation of the 
views taught in them on the subject of the real presence, we annex several 
proof passages : 

1) The Augsburg Confession says (Art. X.) : " The true (wahre,) or 
real body and blood of Christ are verily (assuredly, truly, :c wahrhaftig- 
lich) present, and distributed and received by the communicants, &c. 

2) The Apology to the Confession, Art. X. states : " The tenth Article 
(of the Augsb. Conf.) is not objected to by our opponents, (the Romanists) 
in which we confess that the body and blood of the Lord are truly and 
substantially (vere et substantialiter) present, and tendered, and received, 
as the {Romish) church has hitherto believed (wie man bis anher in der 
Kirchen gehalten hat.) That is, the Augsburg Confession was intended 
by Melancthon, who wrote it, and was understood by those who receive it, 
to teach the actual presence of the real body and blood of Christ, in the 
sense in which it had been taught by the Romish church generally, and 
also by the. Greeks, who are named in the context, and also believed in 
transubstantiation. 

3) The Form of Concord. Pars. I. § VII. De Csena Domini, employs 
the following language, affirming that the body and blood of Christ are 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 127 

The lanQTiaore of Jesus relative to the wine, "Drink ye 
all out of it," (the cup,) <rsro yap scfri to aijuwx, jjlx, (fee. (for 
this is my blood,) is to be thus interpreted : "Drink ye all 
of this ivine, which is not my blood, and remains wine, but 
which is the outward element, in, with, or under which my 
true blood is truly and substantially present, and is distributed 
with the wine, and is received by the mouth by all communi- 
cants." 

The objections to this interpretation, are very similar to 
those which oppress the Romish doctrine of transubstantia- 
tion, though not quite as strong. 

a) It contradicts the clear and indisputable testimony of 
our senses. This theory requires us to believe, not as the 
Papists do, that the bread ceases to be bread, and has been 
transmuted into the body and blood of the Saviour ; but, 
still, that the true body of Christ is actually and substan- 
tially, or as the German copy says, essentially present, and 
yet it cannot be perceived by our senses. The body of 
Christ, whilst on earth, was always perceptible by the 
senses, like other bodies : and even after his resurrection 
and glorification, whenever he was present at any place, 

truly and substantially (or, as the German copy states., essentially) pre- 
sent : " Quseritnr an in sacra Ca?na, verum corpus et verus sanguis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi vere et subslaniialiier sint presentia, atque cum pane 
etvino distribuantur et ore sumantur ab omnibus illis qui hoc' sacramentum 
utuntur — Cingliani negant — nos vero asseveramus." " Ob in dem Heili- 
gen Abendmalil, der wahrhaftige Leib mid Blut unseres Herrn Jesu Christi 
wahrhaftiy uud icesentlich gegenwartig sei ; mit Brodt und Wein ausge- 
theilt und mit dem Ilunde empfangen werde, von alien so sich dieses Sac- 
raments gebrauchen. Die Sacramentirer sagen nein, voir say en ja," 

"SVe are aware, that the Form of Concord rejects the idea of a gross Ca- 
pernaitish eating and drinking in tbe eueharist, according to which the 
flesh of the Redeemer is manducated by the teeth, and digested like other 
food. Huller Symb. Books, p. 543. It would therefore be the height of 
injustice to charge the adherents of the symbols with believing these con- 
sequences. Yet if they properly flow from their doctrines., they may justly 
be alleged as objections to the doctrine itself, by all who regard them aa 
its legitimate consequences. 

They farther pronounce the mode of eating and drinking to be a "spir- 
itual" one. + o which, in its natural import, we ourselves believe; but they 
also add, " we believe that the body and blood of Christ are received not 
only spiritually by faith, but also by the mouth" and those are condemned 
who affirm that this reception is "only spiritual by faith," and not oral. 
The symbolical books also claim for the glorified body of Christ, by virtue 
especially of the hypostatic union, the possession of properties different 
from those of other matter, and even of other glorified bodies. Yet, as 



128 THE JJATUKE OF THE SAVIOUE-'S 

his glorified body also was perceptible, even the nail prints 
in his hands and the wounds in his side. This glorified 
body, like that of believers in general, will still be a body,. 
however elevated and refined in its properties ; and being a 
body, it remains matter, and like ail human bodies, visible 
and tangible. 

It cannot indeed be denied, that God, by a miracle^ might 
so interpose as to make the body of the Saviour invisible 
on sacramental occasions ; but where is the intimation in 
any part of the narrative, that there should be a miracle 
wrought? Or is there the least shadow of evidence, that 
the apostles thought any thing miraculous had occurred ? 
Do they manifest any surprise? Certainly not, and we 
have, therefore, no authority to suppose the existence of a 
miracle. 

b) It also contradicts the observation of all ages and 
nations, that every body, or that material substance must 
occupy a definite portion of space ; and cannot be at more 
than one place at the same time. According to this view, 
the body of Christ must be able to occupy different portions 
of space at the same time. It must be here, in Gettysburg, 
and in New York and Boston, and London and in Africa, 



this assumption is considered gratuitous by those who reject this doctrine, 
they, of course, do not admit its force. And it deserves to be ever remem- 
bered, that only fourteen years after the Form of Concord was published, 
when Duke Frederick William, during the minority of Christian II. pub- 
lished the Visitation Articles of Saxony, in 1594, in order to suppress 
the Melancthonian tendencies to reject this and other peculiarities of the 
symbols, the article on this subject, framed by men confessedly adhering 
to the old symbols, and designing to re- enunciate their true import, and 
enforced upon the whole church iu Saxony as symbolic, give the most ob- 
jectionable view of this doctrine, viz.: I. "The pure doctrine of our 
Church is, that the words, '-'Take and eat, this is my body : drink, this is- 
my blood, are to be understood simply and according to the letter." 
II. That the body (which is received and eaten) is the proper and natural 
body (der rechte naturliche Leib) of Christ, which hung upon the cross ; 
and the blood (which is drunk) is the proper and natural blood (das 
rechte, naturliche Blut,) which flowed from the side of Christ." Muller's 
Symb. Books, p. 847. Now we cannot persuade ourselves, that this is the 
view of a single minister of the General Synod, or of many out of it ; and 
yet these are the views they are obligated to receive if they avow implicit 
allegiance to the former symbolical books of our Church in Europe. If 
tKey adopt the modification received by many of our distinguished divines, 
sucn as Mosheim, Reinhardt and others, they do not faithfully embrace the 
symbolical doctrine, and should not profess to do so-. 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 129 

and in Asia, at the same time, if Christians are simulta- 
neously celebrating the holy supper ; and yet his body was 
a human body like our own, whilst on earth, and even after 
its glorification, was confined to one place at a time, as it 
had been before. When the glorified Redeemer, appeared 
to Mary Magdalene at the tomb, he was not also with his 
disciples in Jerusalem. When he appeared to Cleopas and 
another disciple on the way to Emmaus, he was not simul- 
taneously among the apostles in Jerusalem. When he ap- 
peared to the assembled apostles in the absence of Thomas, 
Thomas did not see him elsewhere at the same time. Yvlien 
he was on the mount in Galilee, or at the sea of Tiberius, 
or finally at Bethany, whence he ascended, he was seen no 
where else. In short, his body seems to have been as much 
confined to one locality at a time, after his resurrection, as 
before his death. Since, therefore, we have no intimation 
in the Scriptures, that glorified bodies, in general, can oc- 
cupy different portions of space at the same time, and since 
the body of Christ after his resurrection did in every in- 
stance appear under this restriction to one locality, and 
there is no intimation of a miracle in the Eucharist ; the 
evidence all seems to be against the doctrine of the real 
presence of the body of Christ at the eucharist, in different 
places, at the same time. 

; • Nor can the assumption of "the Form of Concord (Muller, 
p. 667-8,) that the body of Christ possesses two other modes 
of presence, beside the local presence, be sustained, either 
by reason or the word of God. The alleged " spiritual" 
presence of the Saviour's body, is, literally interpreted, a 
contradiction in terms. And the other, the "divine or 
heavenly" presence, which is attributed to his body in com- 
mon with the Deity, is wholly unscriptural, as well as op- 
posed to the essential, unchangeable difference between the 
creature and the Creator, the finite and the Infinite.. 
;. c) This interpretation cannot be correct, because the glo- 
rified body, which is said to be received with the elements, 
had actually not yet any existence, and therefore could not 
have been given by the Saviour to his disciples at the Holy 
Sunper. The idea, that it is impossible for the same thing 
to be and not to be at the same time, is not only an immu- 
table law of all created things ; so far as the human mind 
can perceive, it is applicable to the Deity himself, and it is 



130 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

usually admitted, that things contradictory in their nature, 
are not embraced in the range of the divine omnipotence. 
Hence, if Christ had intended his supper for this purpose, 
lie would have told his disciples, "Ye cannot indeed now 
receive this supper in its proper import, nor receive my 
body in it, as I am yet alive and amongst you;" or rather, 
if it had been the intention of Christ to give us his real 
glorified body in the eucharist, he would have deferred the 
institution of the ordinance till after his resurrection, or 
have left it to his apostles to institute it, after he had wholly 
left this world, and ascended to his heavenly glory. 

d) The eucharist could not have conferred the broken 
body to the disciples at its institution ; because it was not 
yet broken, crucified, dead : nor to the followers of Christ 
after his resurrection, because it no longer exists in a broken, 
dead state, but in a risen, re-animated, glorified condition. 
Therefore, the words rxro sgi, "this is," must, of necessity, 
have been figuratively understood by the disciples at the 
time of their delivery, in the institution of the supper. 

e) The old Lutheran theory cannot be correct, according 
to the language of Christ, because he says, Luke xxii, 19, 
"Do this in remembrance of me," lis rfv g/x^v ava/xv^tfjv, i. e. 
in mei recordationem, (Schleusner,) in commemoration of 
me ; but we perform an act in remembrance of any person 
or event, only when it is past and absent. "We deliver a 
sermon in commemoration or memory of the Reformation, 
or of General Washington, only because they are past and 
absent. Even when we commemorate the deeds of living 
men, those deeds must be past, which are to constitute the 
burden of our eulogy. 

/) That the doctrine of the real presence cannot be true, 
is proved by those passages of scripture which represent 
Christ as having left this world, as having returned to the 
Father, and as being seated at his right hand in heaven ; 
John xvi. 28, "I came forth from the Father, and am come 
into the world;" again, "I leave the world, and go to the 
Father." Matth. xxvi. 11. "For ye have the poor always 
with you ; butme ye have not always." John xvi. 7. "It 
is expedient for you that I go away, for if I go not away, 
the Comforter will not come unto you ; but if I depart, I 
will send him unto you." We are told by the Saviour him- 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 131 

self, not to yield credence to such as say, "Lo, here is Christ 
or there." Matth. xxiv. 23. 

When he took his final leave of his disciples, Luke tells 
us, "he was carried up into heaven" And although the 
Saviour left on record the delightful promise, that he would 
be always with his disciples till the end of the world ; it 
was in his divine nature, which is omnipresent ; and his next 
visible appearance, the angels informed the men of Galilee 
at his ascension, would again be from heaven in like manner, 
as they had seen him ascend. Acts i. 11. 

In Acts iii. 21, Peter declares, that " The heavens must re- 
ceive him until the times of the restitution ((Ltfowfrag'agis, 
fulfillment or accomplishment, ) of all the things which God 
had spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets, since the 
world began." We are told by Paul, "That the Lord will 
descend from heaven as with the voice of an archangel," 
1 Thess. iv. 16; and again, the same inspired writer ex- 
horts the Colossians, "Seek those things which are above, 
where Christ sitleth on the right hand of God." iii. 1. ISTow 
whilst all these passages and many others, teach us that 
Christ has left this world, and is now seated in heaven, we 
know of not a single passage which intimates that he is 
present at any sacramental celebration, But if it were true, 
that his body, which was last seen ascending to heaven, is 
all the while present on earth, at one or other place where 
the supper is commemorated, and often at thousands of 
places at the same moment ; is it unreasonable to suppose, 
that such a remarkable fact, such an almost incessant mira- 
cle in the church of all ages, would at least be alluded to in 
a single instance in the New Testament ? 

g) Again, whilst the idea, that Christ is figuratively rep- 
resented as the spiritual food of the believer, is a delightful, 
consoling and becoming one ; the supposition that the be- 
liever is to eat the actual flesh of his best friend, and drink 
his real blood, is a gross, repulsive and unnatural idea, Yvhich 
nothing but the clearest evidence would authorize us to adopt. 
The eating of flesh and blood even of beasts was forbidden 
bj the Jewish law, Gen. ix. 4. ; with how much more horror 
would the disciples of the Saviour have been filled, had 
they understood him as enjoining on them habitually to eat 
and drink his body and blood ? Yet they exhibit no indi- 
cation of such horror or surprise, and, therefore, did not un- 



132 THE NATURE OP THE SAVIOUR'S 

derstand the Saviour as requiring such, a repulsive act. Yea, 
the council of apostles and elders, at Jerusalem, after the 
Saviour's death, prohibit the eating of blood. Acts xv. 28. 
Hence, it is not surprising that, amid the long catalogue of 
Protestant creeds, of every denomination, there is not a 
single one, which adopts this doctrine of the real presence 
of the body and blood of Christ in the eucharist, except the 
Augsburg Confession and the other former symbolical books 
of our church. Several Protestant symbols do indeed em- 
ploy language seemingly implying this doctrine, but they ex- 
plain it away in other passages, so that this doctrine is not 
understood to belong to any other church. We know the 
Form of Concord rejects the idea of gross Capernaitish 
eating ; but it at the same time denies that it is mere figura- 
tive eating, eating by faith alone, and between literal and 
figurative eating of a real body of flesh and blood, there is 
no third or intermediate mode of eating conceivable. The 
term "spiritual" is used by the Form of Concord ; but ap- 
plied to eating and drinking material flesh and blood, it must 
signify figurative eating, or it signifies nothing intelligible 
at all. 

But are there no arguments in favor of the doctrine of the 
real presence ? 

There are several expressions, in the portion of Scripture 
discussing this subject, which have been supposed to favor 
Luther's interpretation. At first view, and especially in 
our vulgar version, they may seem to possess the appearance 
of force ; yet, on close examination, this will disappear, es- 
pecially before the mass of contrary evidence, pervading the 
whole passage. 

1. 1 Cor. xi. 29. " Wherefore whosoever shall eat this 
bread and drink this cup (wine) of the Lord, unworthily, 
shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord," hoyog 
sffVaj <rx ai:[kourog xai <rou uiiActrog' rov X' P l * '• " shall be guilty 
of the body and -blood of the Lord ;" that is, " shall com- 
mit sin in regard to the body and blood of the Lord," viz., 
by treating the solemnly appointed commemoration of them 
with levity or irreverence. It has been said, " How could 
we be guilty of the body of Christ, if it were not present ?" 
We answer : To be guilty of the body, means in the orig- 
inal, to be guilty or commit sin in reference to the body ; 
that is, to make the body of Christ the occasion of commit- 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 133 

ting sin. And must not all admit, that we can and often 
do commit sin in regard to absent persons and things ? 
May we not sin, or be guilty in regard to an absent friend, 
by slandering or even thinking ill of him, just as well as 
when he is present ? Do we not insult the majesty of an 
absent king, when we treat with indignity a monument or 
other memorial which has been established in honor of 
him ? And the unworthy communicant is specifically said 
to have been guilty in reference to the body of Christ, be- 
cause it was his body, which was specially represented by 
the symbols which he treats irreverently in the Lord's 
Supper. He is guilty of treating with irreverence, that 
sacred institution which the Saviour appointed under the 
most affecting circumstance, to commemorate the breaking 
of his body and shedding of his blood upon the cross, and 
thus commits sin in regard to the body and blood of the 
Lord. Thus, James ii. 10, the phrase, "guilty o/"," svoy^, 
is used in the same general acceptation : Whosoever shall 
keep the whole law, and yet shall offend in one point, is 
guilty of all (yeyovs irwruv (vo.uwv) svo^oc), commits sin in 
regard to all other points of the law. 

The reason of their guilt is further described by Paul 
thus, " not discerning the Lord's body," that is, not distin- 
guishing between ordinary bread and these consecrated 
symbols of the Lord's body and blood. Ernesti justly re- 
marks, 1 that this use of the term employed by the Apostle, 
"discerning," ■(tfiaxpivtfv,) originated from the Jewish 
habit of distinguishing clean from unclean meats, according 
to the law of Moses. Those were said not to discern or 
distinguish the meats, who ate indiscriminately both clean 
and unclean or forbidden meats. See Ezek. xliv. 23. This 
remark is the more important, as the Apostle Paul had, in 
the previous context (x. 18 and 27) spoken of things offered 
in sacrifice both by the Jews and Gentiles. 

2. The other passage, is 1 Cor. x. 16. The cup of bles- 
sing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of 
Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion 
of the body of Christ? "ou;£j (roAWr/piov) xoivwvia <rs ajfxa- 
rag r& Xpics e&ri; — ("rov aprov) ouXi xoivcovia ts tfC^OLTog <r& 
Xpijs efriv ;" 

(1) Opusc. theol. p. 136. 
12 



134 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

Kojvcovia. The term xoivawa, communion, has several sig- 
nifications in the 1ST. T. 1, communication or bestowment of 
a benefit, beneficence. See Rom. xv. 26. 2 Cor. ix. 13. 

2, conjunction, society, spiritual communion. Acts ii. 42. 
And they continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine 
and fellowship, (xoivowa.) 1 Cor. i. 9. God is faithful by 
whom ye were called to the fellowship, (xo;vwvia,) of his 
Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 

2 Cor. vi. 14. What communion, (xoivwvia,) community 
•of interest, or adaptation for close union, hath light, the 
children of light, christians, with darkness, the children of 
darkness, "unbelievers." 

2 Cor.xiii. 13. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and 
the love, of God, and the communion, (xojitcovia,) of the Holy 
Ghost, be with you all. 

Gal. ii. 9. And when James, Cephas and John, who 
seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given 
me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hand oi fellow- 
ship, (xojvwvioc.) 

Ephes. hi. 9. And to make all men see what is the fel- 
lowship (xojvwvia) which hath been hid in God. 

Philipp. i. 5. I thank my -God — for your fellowship 
(xoivwvia) in the Gospel from the first day until now. 

ii. 1. If there be— -any fellowship (xoivuvia) of the 

Spirit, — fulfil ye my joy, &c. 

iii. 10. That I may know the power of his resur- 
rection and the fellowship (xojvwvia) of his sufferings. 

Phil. v. 6. That the communication (xoivwvia) of thy 
faith may become effectual. 

1 John i. 3, 6, 7. That ye also may have fellowship 
(xoivwvia) with us, &c. 

As to the Lutheran and Romish interpretation, which 
supposes this passage to teach the actual presence of the 
body and blood of Christ, it is liable to all the' objections 
above enumerated in regard to that doctrine. But a moral 
signification, as is evident from the passages just quoted, 
is far more agreeable to the usus loquendi, and is perfectly 
easy and natural. The cup of the blessing — is it not the 
communion, does it not bring us spiritually into communion 
with the body of Christ, &c. In the same sense it is said 
of the Jews in v. 18 : "are not they who eat of the sacri- 
fices, partakers of the altar ? ou^i-xoivwvoj rou Sucfjatfr/jpis 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 135 

Si&i, in communion with the altar ? here we find the very 
same word, xoivwvoi, employed, and yet, who would infer, 
that the Jews ate the God whom they worshipped, or 
the altar on which they sacrificed, or any thing more 
than the outward offerings ? In like manner, in the next 
verse, 20, "The things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they 
sacrifice to devils or demons, — and I would not that ye 
should have fellowship, communion, jcon/idvoug rcov <5cu ( aoviwv 
yaveo^ai, with devils. Who would suppose, that the Gen- 
tiles, in their sacrifices, had communion with the bodies of 
the dead heroes and demigods whom they worshipped ? 
Yet if the word, jcojvwvio, (and xoivaivsg, ) in the one case, 
means the actual participation of the flesh and blood of the 
beino* commemorated, what reason can be assigned for its 
.paving so different a signification in the other? The lan- 
guage in both cases is substantially the same, yea, the 
identical word, only in one case used substantively, and 
with the other adjectively. If, then, the words mean, that 
the sacramental communicant receives the flesh and blood 
of Christ, in addition to the outward elements, they also 
teach, that the partakers at heathen altars, likewise eat the 
flesh and drink the blood of those heroes and demigods to 
whom they offer sacrifice. 

In addition to the scriptural passages in favor of the pres- 
ence of the body of the Saviour in the Lord's Supper, there 
is a theological argument or theory, which, though in part 
rejected by Luther himself, was adopted by some of his 
followers, and about a quarter of a century after his death, 
was introduced in its full development into the Form of Con- 
cord, which became the standard of Lutheran orthodoxy in 
some parts of Germany. Luther's view of the personal 
union of the two natures in Christ he thus judiciously ex- 
presses : If it should be objected on the ground of reason, 
"That the Godhead cannot suffer nor die ; you must an- 
swer : That is true ; nevertheless, as the divinity and hu- 
manity in Christ constitute one person, therefore the Scrip- 
tures, on account of this personal unity, also attribute every 
thing to the Deity, which occurred to the humanity, and vice 
versa. This is, moreover, accordant with truth ; for you 
must affirm that the person ( Christ, ) suffers and dies. Now 
the person is the true God, therefore it is proper to say, the 
Son of God suffers. For although one part (if I may so 



136 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

speak) namely, the Godhead does not suffer ; still the person 
which is God, suffers in its other part, that is in its humanity 
(denn obwohl das erne Stueck (dasz ieh so rede) als die 
Gottheit nicht leidet ; so leidet dennoch die Person, welche 
Gott ist, am andern Stuecke, als an der Menschheit.) Thus 
we say, The king's son has a sore, and yet it is only his leg- 
that is affected : Solomon is wise, and yet it is only his soul 
which possesses wisdom : Absalom is beautiful, and yet it 
was only his body that is referred to : Peter is gray, and 
yet it is only his head of which this is affirmed. For as soul 
and body constitute but one person, every thing which hap- 
pens either to the body or the soul, yea even to the smallest 
member of the body, is justly and properly attributed to the 
whole person. This mode of expression is not peculiar to 
the Scriptures, but prevails throughout the world, and is 
also correct. Thus the Son of God was in truth crucified 
for us, that is, the person which is God ; for this person, I 
say, was crucified according to its humanity." ( Luth. Works, 
Jena edit, vol. 3, p. 457.) Yet Luther, also, sometimes em- 
ployed language inconsistent with the statements which he 
here makes. The theory above referred to, was claimed by 
its advocates as a legitimate sequence of the hypostatic union 
of the two natures of Christ, and is known as the Commu- 
nicatio Idiomatum, or supposed reciprocal communication of 
attributes between the two natures of the Saviour, one re- 
sult of which is to be, that his body now possesses ubiquity ; 
and, therefore, can not only be present simultaneously 
wherever the Holy Supper is administered, but actually is 
present every where else in the universe. In support of this 
opinion several Scripture passages are alleged : 

Coloss. ii. 9. For in him dwelleth the fullness of the God- 
head, bodily" tfwfxccrjxw^. This passage, we think, naturally 
signifies, in Christ the real, not imaginary, the full divinity 
and not an inferior deity dwells ; that is, with his human 
nature the truly divine nature is really, not figuratively, or 
typically, but actually united c'w|u,a<n%wg personally, that is, 
into one person. This signification of the term tfu/Jkrt, as sig- 
nifying person, is found both in the N. T. and in classic 
Greek. James hi. 6. So is the tongue among our mem- 
bers that it defileth the whole body, i. e. person (oXov to cw^a, ) 
for certainly the fact, that "the tongue is a world of in- 
iquity," does not consist in its polluting the literal body, but. 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST 137 

the person, the character of the individual. Thus also 
Xenophon uses tfwju.a-ra sXsi&spa, for freemen, free persons. 
Lycurgus, and Aeschynes employ tfwj.ct in the same sense, 
to signify a person. The same usage meets us in the Latin 
language : Longeque ante omnia corpora Nisus emicat. 
iEneid v. 1. 318, where the reference is to- the person in gen- 
eral. And even in our own tongue, the term body has the 
same meaning, in such phrases as " some body," " no body,' 7 
&c, for some person, no person, &c. 

John iis. 34. "For God giveth not the Spirit by measure 
unto him," (but d^srpug). This may signify, that the in- 
spiration of the Holy Spirit did not rest on the Saviour, only 
at particular times and in a limited degree, as it did on the 
prophets of the Old Testament ; but at all times and in an 
unlimited degree. Or the idea may be, that the actual or 
entire divinity dwelt in him, i. e. was personally united with 
him. But there is certainly no intimation in it of the transfer 
of the divine attributes to the humanity of Christ. 

Matth. xxviii. 18. "All power (Vao'a sfxtfra all authority, 
not tfatfa 5-jvauis) is given unto me in heaven and on earth." 
This certainly does not signify power, omnipotence ; but all 
or full authority to command and direct all things on earth 
to the accomplishment of the purposes of his mediatorial 
reign. 

In this sense the word (sfxtfia), translated power in the 
passage under consideration, is often employed in the New 
Testament. Thus, Matth. xxi. 23, the chief priests and 
elders, came to him, when he was teaching, and said : "By 
what authority (sfstfia) doest thou these things ?" And (viL 
£9,) the people were astonished at his doctrine, "For he 
taught them as one having authority (l^tf/a), and not as the 
scribes." In the same general sense, as signifying author- 
ity, liberty, &rc, having no reference to omnipotence or 
physical power, this word is employed in many other pas- 
sages, so that the declaration of the Saviour: "All power 
or authority is given to me," has no necessary reference to- 
physical power or omnipotence. See Matth. ix. 6. Mark 
[i. 10. Luke v. 24. 1 Cor. ix. 4, 18. 2 Thess. iii. 9. In 
perfect accordance with this import, is the classic usage 
of the word sZpf.a,, as signifying "licentia, potestas, aucto- 
ritas, jus sive facultas moralis ; at SwapAg vis activa, sen 
facultas naturalist licence, power, authority, a moral right ; 
12a 



138 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

whilst Swa;iK signifies a physical or natural faculty or 
power. 

To this doctrine of the ubiquity of the body of Christ, 
numerous and formidable objections present themselves. 

1. The idea that the properties of one substance can be- 
come the properties of a different substance, is a philosophical 
absurdity. 

2. It is impossible, in the nature of things, that the infi- 
nite properties of God, the uncreated one, should be com- 
municated to any creature. The difference between the 
creature and the Creator is an infinite and unchangeable one. 
Yet, if the human nature of Christ acquired possession of 
divine attributes, it must itself be divine. 

3. Wherever any one divine attribute is found, there the 
others must also be, and that is God. If then the body of 
Christ, or his humanity in general, possesses one divine at- 
tribute, it must possess them all and must be God. Yes the 
finite has become infinite, the creature has become the Cre- 
ator, and a feeble mortal like unto us in all things, sin only 
excepted, has become the immortal God. 

A distinction has been made between mediate and imme- 
diate communication, and it has been affirmed the attributes 
of Deity have been communicated to the man Jesus only 
mediately. But mediate communication in reference to this 
subject is no communication at all, and can only signify, that 
the divine nature of Christ is at all times ready to exert 
his divine attributes for the accomplishment of the purposes 
of the associated humanity, and this no one denies, but this 
cannot with propriety of language be styled communication 
of attributes. 

4. If the hypostatic union in Christ implies a communi- 
cation of attributes, it must be reciprocal ; and whilst the 
humanity of Christ is clothed in the attributes of divinity, his 
divinity must also have assumed the attributes of humanity : 
have become human ; which the opponents are unwilling to 
admit. 

5. If this hypostatic union is attended by a transfer of 
attributes, it necessarily involves a confusion of natures, 
which error was condemned by the ancient church in the 
Eutychians. And if it was such as to preserve the attri- 
butes of each nature distinct, then there can be no real 
transfer of attributes. 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 139 

6. The doctrine of the ubiquity of Christ's body instead 
of conferring more importance on the Eucharist, actually 
robs it of all special interest, and gives no more to the sacra- 
ment than to every other object and place. We may upon 
this theory, as vrell say that Christ's body is in, with or 
under, every apple and pear, peach and cake, as in the 
consecrated bread. 

7. Nay this doctrine is not entirely exempt from liability 
to the charge of favoring pantheism. If Christ's body is 
omnipresent, we are in him and he in us, whether believers 
or unbelievers we are one : especially as all bodies must 
have extension, and occupy space, and exclude other bodies. 
The idea also that Christ's body nourishes our souls has a 
similar tendency, by leading to the supposition that soul and 
body are ultimately identical, or of the same substance. 

8. If the glorified body of Christ is really in, with, or 
under the bread, it will be very proper to direct our worship 
towards the bread, and thus adore the present God-man 
who is somehow connected with it. For we know that his 
divine nature is there, as it is omnipresent: and therefore 
we would have as much reason to worship towards the bread 
as if he were personally and visibly to appear in connexion 
with it. 

9. It will be admitted that the union of the two natures 
in Christ, was just as real and intimate during his life on 
earth as it ever will be ; (for it is decided by the Form of 
Concord, to have commenced at the moment of his concep- 
tion by the Virgin Mary.) Now as this union produced not 
even the shadow of a communicatio idiomaturn (transfer or 
communication of attributes) on earth, it is not probable 
that it will hereafter. It certainly proves, that such com- 
munication is not the natural result of the hypostatic union 
in Christ, and therefore it cannot be true, unless the Scrip- 
tures expressly teach that this union will produce very dif- 
ferent results in eternity from those which attend it in this 
world, which is not contended. 

Finally, the discourse of our Lord to his disciples at Ca- 
pernaum, recorded in John vi. 25-55, has sometimes, though 
contrary to the example of Luther and the other principal 
reformers, been supposed to refer to the holy supper, and to 
teach the literal manducation of the Saviour's body and the 
drinking of his blood. It is true our Saviour here employs 



140 THE NATURE OF OUR' S AVI OTIR'S 

the language, "I am the bread of life," as he elsewhere 
does the expression, "I am the Tine," and "I am the light 
of the world," &c. John viiL 12. Again, the Saviour also 
says, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink 
his blood, ye have no life in you," <kc. v. 54. That these 
and similar expressions in this discourse, can have no refer- 
ence to the Lord's supper, is evident from the fact, that no 
such ordinance as the eucharist then existed, or had been 
heard of. This discourse, according to the most probable 
chronological arrangement of the evangelical narrative, was 
delivered about a year before the Saviour instituted it, and 
before his disciples could possibly have had the least idea of 
such intended memorial. Of course they could not under- 
stand these words, as referring to an ordinance of which 
they had never heard, and to the future institution of which 
there was not a single allusion in the discourse itself. 

Again, that the Saviour in this entire discourse had refer- 
ence to his being the food of believers, is abundantly evident 
from the phraseology employed. I) In v. 35, to the words, 
"I am the bread of life," he immediately adds by way of 
explanation, " he that cometh to me, shall never hunger, he 
that believeth on me shall never thirst," showing that it is by 
faith, that he becomes the bread of life to us. 2) v. 40. 
" He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life," show- 
ing the necessity of faith to the enjoyment of this spiritual 
food. Also, 3) v. 47. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he 
that believeth on me hath everlasting life — I am that bread of 
life." 4) v. 51. The bread which I will give is my flesh, 
which I will give for the life of the world," i. e. which flesh 
I will give, not to believers to be eaten ; but for them on the 
cross ; and not for believers only, who receive the holy sup- 
per, but for the "world," many who reject my atonement 
and never celebrate the supper, which I shall institute in 
commemoration of my death. If sacramental eating were 
intended, it must have been limited to his professed follow- 
ers, who celebrate the ordinance ; and could not have been 
extended to the world at large who neglect it. 5) v. 56. 
"He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth 
in me and I in him." If this passage teaches a physical 
eating and indwelling of the Saviour's body in the commu- 
nicant, it also affirms that the communicant's body dwells in 
the body of the Saviour, which is absurd. 6) v. 61*. "It is 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 141 

the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing : the 
words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are 
life." Here the Saviour seems, in the closing- words of this 
discourse, expressly to teach that the literal eating of his 
flesh would profit them nothing ; that it is the Spirit that 
quickeneth, and that his words are spirit, are to be spirit- 
ually and not literally understood. This interpretation is 
moreover confirmed by the succeeding remark of Christ : 
7) v. 64. "But there are some of you that believe not," 
some who have no faith, and therefore cannot thus spiritu- 
ally feed on my flesh and blood. From all these considera- 
tions, we cannot but coincide with the judgment of Luther 
and the most distinguished divines of ancient and modern 
days, as expressed by the learned Lutheran theologian 
Gerhard : " The -passage, John vi. 53, does not treat of sacra- 
mental but of spiritual eating the body and drinking the blood 
of Christ, which is essential to salvation for all." l 

§ 4. The second tropical Interpretation (by Calvin.) 

The third interpretation of these words is that of Calvin, 
which though generally abandoned by his followers in Eu- 
rope and America, is deserving- of a passing notiee. That 
distinguished Reformer, animated by a noble desire to pre- 
vent a schism in the Protestant church of Europe, though 
he could not adopt the view of Luther on this subject, la- 
boured hard to come as near it as possible, without making 
bimseli liable to the grosser objections which lie against the 
Lutheran dogma. He supposed the words of the institution 
to teach, not that the body and blood of Christ are present 
at the celebration of the eucharist ; but that they remain ia 
heaven, and from there a supernatural influence emanates 
from the glorified body of Christ, by which the soul of the 
believer is animated and strengthened in a mysterious 
manner. 

This interpretation is indeed free from the charge of con- 
flicting with the testimony of the senses ; but it seems so 
entirely different from either the literal or the figurative 



(1) Dictum John vi. 53, non de sacramentali sed spirituali corporis et 
sanguinis Clmsti manducatione et bibitione tractat, quae omnibus ad. 
salutem necessaria est. Loci Theol. de Sacra Coma. 



142 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOURS 

import of the Saviour's words, as to bear evident marks of 
having grown out of extraneous theological considerations. 

Calvin's own language on this subject is : ''I therefore 
maintain, that in the mystery of the supper, by the emblems 
of bread and wine, Christ is really exhibited to us ; that is, 
his body and blood, in which he yielded full obedience, in 
order to work out a righteousness for us ; by which, in the 
first place, we may, as it were, become united with him into 
one body ; and secondly, being made partakers of the sub- 
stance of himself, also be strengthened by the reception of 
every blessing." 1 The entire opinion of Calvin is thus 
stated by Dr. Bretschneider, a very distinguished late writer 
of Germany : " Calvin's spiritual reception of the body and 
blood of Christ, is indeed a real, but not an oral one, and 
consists in this : that in the moment in which we partake of 
the bread and wine, if our hearts are by faith elevated to< 
him, a supernatural influence emanates from the substance 
of the glorified body of Christ, (which is in heaven and 
remains there,) by which the soul of the believer is ani- 
mated and strengthened in a mysterious manner. But the 
unbeliever receives nothing more than bread and wine." 2 

It may, perhaps, be regarded as a striking coincidence, 
that the views of the two most illustrious reformers on this 
subject, have been almost universally abandoned by their 
followers ; even whilst they adhere to nearly all the other 
features of their doctrinal system. Yea, the view of Calvin, 
though the subject of much less controversy, has been 
more universally rejected by those who bear his name, than 
has that of Luther by his followers.. 

§ 5. The true, Historical and Pauline interpretation 
of the words of the institution. 
We come now, in the last place, to attempt an unbiassed, 
impartial examination of the words of the institution, ac-^ 

(1) Dico igitnr in coense mysterio per symbola panis et viai Christum 
vere nobis exhiberi, adeoque corpus et sanguinem ejus, iu quibns omnem 
obedientiam pro comparanda nobis justitia adimplevit ; quo scilicet primum 
in unum corpus cum ipso coalescamus ; deinde participes substantce ejus 
facti, in bonorum omnium communicatione virtutem quoque sentiamus. 
Institut. Lib. IV. Cap. XVII. II.. 

(2) Dr. Bretschneider's Systematiscbe Entwickelung aller in der Dog-- 
Biatik vorkommender Begriffe. p. 721, ed. 3, 1826.. 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 143 

cording to the fair principles of historical interpretation, as 
laid down in our introductory observations. 

Was there any thing peculiar in the occasion and the 
circumstances, attending the utterance of these words, cal- 
culated to illustrate their meaning? 

The Saviour and his disciples had just celebrated the 
Passover, an institution appointed of God to commemorate 
an important event of the Old Testament history, at which 
it was not unusual to use language similar to that of our 
Saviour. At its institution, though it was expressly ap- 
pointed to commemorate the passing of the angel of the 
Lord over the Israelites in Egypt, whilst he destroyed the 
first born of the Egyptians ; yet, Moses uses language sim- 
ilar to that of the Saviour: "Ye shall eat it in haste, for 
it is the Lord's passing over," i. e. it signifies the angel of 
the Lord's passing over the house of the Israelites, &c. 
Exod. xii. 26, 27. No one imagines these words to mean : 
"The lamb that was slain at the passover, was the passing 
over of the Lord's angel." All admit that " zV here is 
equivalent to signifies. 

This ordinance, whilst it commemorated the divine favor 
to the Israelites in Egypt, also, as Paul tells us, was typical 
of the Saviour himself. 

Now, it was at the close of this mnemonic or commem- 
orative and symbolic paschal supper, where symbolic ideas 
prevailed, and figurative language is usual among the Jews, 1 
even to this day, that the Saviour uttered the words under 
consideration. 

1. After the paschal supper, "Jesus took bread" It was 
natural bread, not miraculously furnished. He took the 
bread, which happened to be prepared for the passover, 
and which, according to Jewish law, must be unleavened 
bread. Yet, it is equally certain, from the New Testament, 
as the primitive christians received the Lord's supper every 
week, and often more frequently, that on some occasions, 
they used leavened bread, as no other was at hand. 

2. Jesus "offered a prayer." Mark, and perhaps Mat- 
thew, use the term hXoyrfiag, which signifies «' to bless," 
or pronounce a blessing. But neither of them says, that he 



(1) See Levi's Forms of Prayer for Passover and Pentecost, among the 
Spanish and Portuguese Jews, p. 20. 



144 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

blessed "*£," (<raro,) as our English version has it; Very 
good manuscripts read gu^apitfr^tfaj "having given thanks," 
in Matthew. Luke and Paul both say, "he gave thanks," 
svxapiifrrirfag. There is not a syllable about his effecting 
any change in the bread, as Romanists pretend, nor of his 
making these elements the conductors or means of impart- 
ing his body to us. In short, according to the original, he 
did not specifically bless the bread or wine, nor do anything 
at all to them. He offered thanks, as it was also customary 
to do at the beginning of the paschal supper, and as is in 
itself always appropriate, and invoked the blessing of his 
heavenly Father upon the whole ceremony, of course, also 
including the elements employed. 

3. No change had been effected in the bread. It was 
still natural bread, as the Saviour broke it; which he would 
not have done, if his prayer had transubstantiated it into his 
own body, or in any way made it the vehicle of his mate- 
rial body. It was still natural bread, because the disciples 
exhibited no evidence of having the least idea, that they 
received any thing but bread. 

4. "He gave it to them and said, Take, eat, this is my 
body" \af3srs (payers <rouVo stfri to Coo/ma /ma. 

That the literal interpretation of these words by the Ro- 
manists, as well as several others, which, though profess- 
edly literal, are really figurative, and inconsistent with the 
context, cannot be sustained, we have endeavored to show 
in a former part of this discussion. What, then, is their 
true interpretation? Let us, if possible, derive our guide 
for the true meaning of these words, from the declarations 
of the Saviour himself, and of his apostles. 

1. Let us inquire, Does the breaking of the bread throw 
any light upon our investigation ? 

It must have been done by the Saviour, so far as we can 
judge, from one of two reasons : either because the cake, 
or loaf of bread, was too large to be conveniently handed 
around, or because the Lord intended it to possess some 
significance, either symbolic or other, connected with the 
design of the whole institution. It seems not to have been 
the former, because the bread was then, as is still customary 
among the Arabians, baked in cakes of moderate thickness, 
easily baked through, and convenient for breaking. See 
' Leidensgeschichte Jesu,' p. 45. Stuttgard, 1809. But 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 145 

that he had another and important design in breaking the 
bread or cake, is evident from the fact, that the Saviour 
expressly states, that this broken bread is, or represents his 
' 'body broken," that is, represents the breaking of his body, 
his crucifixion, or death upon the cross. Here then we 
have the infallible declaration of the Lord himself, that the 
broken bread in the eucharist, represents the breaking or 
crucifixion of his body. To represent this fact, the breaking 
of the bread was very appropriate ; but to designate the fu- 
ture presence of his glorified body, it would have no signifi- 
cance or appropriateness at all, The broken bread must be 
a representative of the dead, the crucified body, and cannot 
in any way, be designed to indicate the presence of the liv- 
ing body, either glorified or not. The accuracy of this inter- 
pretation is confirmed by the fact of the Saviour's also men- 
tioning that the wine signified not only his blood, which 
would have been sufficient, if the mere presence of the Lord 
was to be indicated ; but his blood "shed," the shedding of 
his blood on the cross. Should it be said, if the breaking 
of the bread was significant, then also something should 
have been done to the wine, to indicate its being shed ; we 
reply: This was not necessary. The fact that his body 
was broken, already indicates that his blood was shed. 
Besides, the representation of the blood, as separated from 
the bod) r , also implies the same fact. 

%. This is, or represents my body "given" says Luke, 
and "broken," says Paul, "for you." That by these terms, 
"given" and "broken" the crucifixion of the Lord is indi- 
cated, cannot be denied, and we believe is not. But if the 
Lord himself teaches us, that to represent his death upon 
the cross, is the object of the Holy Supper ; then we are 
certain of being correct in supposing and teaching this truth; 
and if others suppose this ordinance was instituted for a 
double purpose, it devolves on them to exhibit proof of the 
other, in the same way as this is established, by declarations 
of Christ or his apostles. Here the onus probandi most 
justly lies on them, and if they fail to prove a second object, 
then this remains the only one, namely, to represent, in all 
coming time, that all-important, amazing fact, which "angels 
desire to look into," the death of the Son of God upon the 
cross, an event which happened about eighteen hundred 
years a^o. As the Holy Supper was certainly instituted to 
13 



146 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

commemorate this eternally important occurrence, an event 
sufficiently momentous to justify the institution of a stand- 
ing rite for its commemoration, it is not probable a priori, 
that another very different object (the presence of the liv- 
ing, glorified Lord) would be joined to it; and as we find 
no clear indication of the fact in Scripture, we are compelled 
to doubt it. 

If the Saviour's object had been to represent the presence 
of his body in the eucharist, the bread entire would have been 
more suitable; and if, in that event, he had even broken 
the paschal cake or bread merely incidentally, there would 
have been no object in his stating the fact. But he him- 
self informs us, it signifies his body "broken," the breaking 
of his body, his crucifixion, his death upon the cross. The 
same remarks are equally applicable to the language of the 
Saviour in reference to the wine. "Take and drink, this is 
my blood," and as Paul and Luke says, "this cup is the 
New Covenant in my blood, 'which is shed' for you — for 
many, for the remission of sins." The wine, therefore, 
most undoubtedly commemorates the shedding of the Sa- 
viour's blood on the cross. 

3. (i Do this in remembrance of me," says the Saviour, 
according to Luke and Paul. Luke has r&ro rfoisTre sig rr\v 
Sfwgv ava/xvTjo'jv, do this in remembrance or in commemoration 
of me ; Paul has the same words, only adding, otfooxjs' 
<xv ifivrjTS,, Do this, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance or 
commemoration of me. Now, the very fact that we are 
called on to do any thing in remembrance of any person or 
event, implies two things. First, it presupposes the priority 
or antecedence of the event ; it implies that the event is 
past. Even when we commemorate any actions of a living 
person, those actions must be past. The very import of the 
word remember, necessarily implies that the thing to be re- 
membered, is a something past. Again, the term "remem- 
brance" implies the absence of the person or thing to be 
remembered. When our friend is with us, we do not need 
any rite or ceremony to remind us of the fact. ISTor can 
we, in propriety of language, be said to "remember" & pres- 
ent object or friend. The very necessity of such a rite, if 
our friend were with us, would convey a reflection on our 
attachment to him. It is, when about to separate, that friends 
bestow on each other mementoes ; or agree on the stated 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 147 

performance of some act to keep alive the remembrance of 
each other during their separation. JS T ow, both these im- 
plications of the Saviour's words, "Do this in remembrance 
of me," accord perfectly with the object of the eucharist 
as explained by himself. At the celebration of this stand- 
ing rite of the church, in commemoration of the breaking 
or crucifixion of his body, the fact would be past, and his 
body would be absent. The glorious fact of his atoning 
death on the cross, would, from century to century, be re- 
ceding farther and farther into the past, and as objects are 
in danger of being forgotten in proportion as they recede 
farther from us, nothing could be more appropriate than 
the institution of an ordinance, to keep alive in the forget- 
ful memory of his disciples, that fundamental fact in the 
.history of redemption, which is the ground of every be- 
liever's hope, and on which the salvation of a world is sus- 
pended. 

But, if the design, of the eucharist is a two-fold one ; if, 
in addition to the commemoration of the crucifixion of the 
Son of God, that ordinance was, as some suppose, also ap- 
pointed for the purpose of commemorating . the Saviour's 
presence with us, and the communication of his body to the 
communicant, the language, "in remembrance of me," ap- 
pears not only strange, but inappropriate. It would have 
been more natural for him to say : "As often as ye eat this 
bread, and drink of this cup, ye do celebrate my return to 
your midst." 

The Pauline Interpretation or the Saviour's Words. 

Such are the intimations concerning the design of this 
solemn ordinance, furnished by the words of the Saviour 
himself. If we had no other, they would incontestibly es- 
tablish the fact, that it is a mnemonic lite, instituted to com- 
memorate the death of Christ on the cross. But we have 
still another inspired narrative of this institution, from the 
distinguished Apostle of the Gentiles, twenty-four years 
after the establishment of this ordinance, and the ascension 
of the Saviour to heaven. 1 Cor. xi. 23-30. And what did 
Paul regard as the design of this holy feast of love ? 

1 ) He also declares the bread to stand related to the 
broken body, to signify the breaking of Christ's body, as 



148 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

above intimated. " The Lord Jesus, the same night in 
which he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given 
thanks, he brake it and said, Take, eat, this is my body 
which is (or is to be) broken for you." 

2) He expressly pronounces the design of this rite to be 
mnemonic, "this do in remembrance of me," the force of 
which words we have above illustrated, as equivalent to 
"Do this in order to keep alive the recollection of a past 
event and of an absent person." 

3) But he adds two other importaut indications, which 
are not contained in the gospels. "For as often as ye eat 
this bread and drink this cup (the wine in it,) rov davarov 
tou xupfs xarayyiXXsrs "ye do showforth, or publish, the death 
of the Lord." Here then we have the plain, literal decla- 
ration of the inspired Paul, as clear as language can make 
it, that the result of the Holy Supper is to commemorate, 
not the Lord's presence, nor his bestowing his body and 
blood on the communicants, but to show forth the Lord's 
death, that amazing display of divine love on the cross, 
which is the foundation fact, the central doctrine of Chris- 
tianity, and the recollection and full appreciation of which, 
is essential to the Christian character. This declaration of 
the Apostle is of incalculable value. The greater portion 
of the language of Christ is or may be figurative, and, there- 
fore, admits of a diversity of interpretations, and it may re- 
main questionable which is their true sense. But this lan- 
guage of Paul is literal, nothing figurative about it, and, 
therefore, in its import all agree. All admit that he designs 
to say, as often as ye celebrate this Holy Supper, ye com- 
memorate, perpetuate the memory of, revive your recollec- 
tion of the death of Jesus on the cross. 

It is certain, then, that this was the object of the Saviour 
in this sacred institution. It is certain, also, that, in the 
view of Paul, this was its great and principal design, if not 
its only one. And it is probable, that he regarded it as the 
only one, since he mentions no other. The expressions from 
which some would deduce another design, " are not the bread 
and wine the communion of the body and blood of Christ," 
have been explained above, we think, satisfactorily. They 
teach that the bread and wine bring us into solemn, spiritual, 
mental communion, or recollection of, and reflection on the 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 149 

Saviour's body and blood, broken and shed for us on the 
cross. 

4) But this illustrious apostle adds another expression 
calculated to reflect light on this subject.^ He adds, "Ye 
do show forth the Lord's death," o^pig ou g'X0.7j, "until he 
come." This solemn declaration clearly teaches three facts ; 
first, that the Lord is himself absent at the celebration of 
the supper, as well as generally after his ascension ; and 
secondly, that he will continue absent personally, as long as 
the supper is to be commemorated ; and thirdly, when he 
comes, his personal presence will supercede the necessity of 
any further observance of a commemorative ordinance. 

About twenty-four years had elapsed since Jesus had as- 
cended to heaven. In the mean time he had been seen by 
no one of all his friends or enemies on earths Whether he 
•had appeared unto Paul, fourteen years before this time, 
when wrapped in holy vision, he was elevated to the third 
heavens, Paul does not state : yet it is highly probable-. 
Once, he had certainly seen him, during his journey to Da- 
mascus. But then he appeared to him in the clouds of 
heaven, evidently from another world. At other times he 
received special communications from him, but it is not cer- 
tain that he again appeared to him personally. All the ex- 
perience of the Apostle therefore, had connected the present 
residence or local existence and manifestation of the Saviour 
with another world, and taught him that Christ was absent, 

These words of Paul also imply, that so long as it is obli- 
gatory on Christians to celebrate this holy feast, the Saviour 
will continue absent ; for they are commanded to repeat its 
celebration often, until he comes ; which involves the conse- 
quence, that when he does come, this celebration shall cease. 
And finally, as this celebration, or commemoration of the 
Saviour's death, if to cease on his personal return to earth, 
it seems a natural supposition, that it was appointed to pre- 
serve in constant memory something, which in his absence 
we would be prone to forget; and Paul tells us, this was 
the grand and cardinal fact in his mediatorial career, his vi- 
carious death upon the cross for the sins of the world. 

Since it is certain that the commemoration of the Lord's- ; 
death is the object of the sacramental institution, the ques- 
tion arises, whether there is any reason to suppose, that the 
Lord had a double object in view. The only arguments in? 
13a 



150 THE NATURE OF THE SAVIOUR'S 

support of such a supposition are found in the supposed ne- 
cessity of a literal interpretation of the phrase rovro stfn <ro 
tfw/xa fiou, "this is my body,*' and the phrase of Paul, 1 Cor. 
X. 16 ; ou^i (to crorrjpjov) Koivuvlarx tfu[xo.rog ra Xpjffrcu sflVi \ 
"is it not (the cup) the communion of the blood of Christ?" 
&C, xai rov aprov, ou^i xotvuviarov tfw,aa : ro£<roij> XpjoVou stf-rj ; and 
" the bread, is it not the communion of the body of Christ ?" 
But as we have already proved, that the literal interpreta- 
tion of the Romanists is utterly untenable ; and that the 
doctrine of the real presence of the body and blood of Christ 
''in, with, or under" the elements, is not a literal one, but 
figurative and unnatural, and at the same time, liable to 
many of the objections, on account of which all Protestants 
repudiate the Romish literal interpretation, we need not re- 
peat them. And having already presented our view of the 
import of the term xoivuvia. " communion," in the Epistle to 
the Corinthians, the only thing which remains, in order to 
vindicate the Pauline interpretation, which we adopt as our 
own, namely, the mnemonic import of the rite, its appoint- 
ment to perpetuate the memory of the Lord's death or cru- 
cifixion, is to show that this figurative or tropical interpre- 
tation of the phrase rou-ro stfri to tfwjxa jxo'j, "this is my 
body," is perfectly sustained by the usus loquendi of the 
New Testament. 

a) Even those who receive the doctrine of the real 
presence, concede that these words do admit of the figura- 
tive meaning for which we contend. The learned and pious 
Dr. Storr remarks: "The words of our Lord, ' This is my 
body,' &c, may indeed be explained figuratively without 
violence to the usus loquendi of the New Testament. The 
figure assumed would not be an uncommon one. Nor can 
it be said that the nature of the case altogether forbids the 
supposition of the language being figurative. For it cannot 
be denied that some of the language used in the, institution 
of the Holy Supper is figurative, (tropical/') 1 Nor is this 
admission made without cause. The reasons sustaining this 
opinion are numerous and most satisfactory. 

b) The Hebrew language does not contain a word to 
express the idea, signify, and therefore the Hebrews 

(1) Storr's Biblical Theology, § 114, 111. 6, p. 537 of 2d ed. of the 
translation. 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 251 

always conveyed that idea by other terms, usually by the 
substantive verb, *Tn, to be. Or perhaps, more frequently 
the phrase is elliptical, and the verb entirely wanting, and 
to be supplied from the context. But the inspired evan- 
gelists have given us the verb sifrr, "is"; and it is the usus 
loquendi of the New Testament, in regard to this term, that 
we are to investigate. 

c) That this method of using the term ""is" for "signi- 
fies," is a very common one among different nations, is well 
known, and the idiom of the Old and New Testament is, in 
this respect, the same. Thus, it was customary for the 
Jews, when interrogated by their children concerning the 
import of the Passover, to reply: "This is the body of the 
Lamb which our fathers ate in Egypt," that is, it signifies 
the lamb, &c. The Psalmist says, (Ps. xviii. 2:) The 
Lord is my rock and my fortress — is my buckler — is the 
horn of my salvation — is my high tower. Ps. xxiii. 1. 
The Lord is my shepherd, &c. &c. 

But the Scriptures abound in cases of the very same 
figure, which we are now considering. Gen. xl. 12. 
Joseph, says, "the three branches are three days, i. e. sig- 
nify three days. xli. 26. The seven good kine are seven 
years. Danl. vii. 24. "The ten horns out of this kingdom 
are ten kings that shall rise." v. 17. " These great beasts 
which are four, are four kings." viii. 21. "And the rough 
goat is the king of Greece." In all the above cases, though 
the language is elliptical, the substantive verb is understood, 
which is expressed in our English Bible. Paul says, 
(1 Cor. x. 4,) "That rock (that followed the Israelites in 
the wilderness) was (^v) Christ." Gal. iv. 24. "For 
these (Sarah and Hagar) are (shftv) the two covenants," 
i. e. signify them. Luke xii. 1. "Beware of the leaven 
of the Pharisees r,rig s&my which is (signifies) hypocrisy. 57 
Heb. vii. 2. "King of Salem, 6 sg'i, that is (signifies) king 
of peace." Mark iv. 15. And these are they by the way- 
side — and on stony ground, — among thorns, <fcc, that is, 
these represent or signify them. 2 Peter ii. 17. These 
(the false prophets) are, that is, signify, wells without 
water. 

But, did the Saviour himself employ such figurative lan- 
guage, in reference to himself, on any other occasion than 
at_ the sacramental supper ? Be doubtless did on various 



152 THE NATUES OF THE SAVIOURS 

occasions. John v. 11, 14, I am the good shepherd, 
vi. 35, 41, 48, 51. I am the bread of life, &yw s/'jxi 6 apro^. 
viii. 12. I am the %^ of the world, syu lijuu ro <pw£ tov 
xq&^ov. x. 7, 9. I am (tyw e/fju) the ofoor of the sheep — - 
"I am the door." xiv. 6. I am the way, the truth and the 
life. xv. 1,2. I am the vine, ye are the branches. I am 
the resurrection and the life — I am the Alpha and Omega, 
the beginning and the end. Here, then, we perceive that 
the Saviour was in the habit of speaking of himself in this 
tropical manner, calling himself bread, a shepherd, a door. 
That he should also compare his body to bread and his 
blood to wine, is, therefore, perfectly accordant with his 
habits; and the figurative use of the phrase "this is," 
rouro sttr'i, is perfectly accordant with the usus loquendi, 
and therefore we are at perfect liberty, according to the 
sound principles of interpretation, to give to there words, 
"this is my body," this is my blood," the meaning, signifies 
my body, signifies my blood, as required by the design of 
the ordinance, as taught by Paul and by the Saviour 
himself, namely, to show forth the Lord's death until he 
come. 

In view of all these facts, it seems evident that the words> 
of the sacramental institution as uttered by the Saviour, re- 
corded by the evangelists, and explained by Paul, are to be 
understood, so far as the mode of the Saviour's presence is 
concerned, as follows : 

"And as they were eating, (the paschal supper,) Jesus 
took bread, (the unleavened bread or cake which had been 
prepared for the passover,) and having given thanks and 
pronounced a blessing, he gave the pieces of bread to his 
disciples, and said, Take, eat, this (bread, which is and re- 
mains bread and) signifies my (natural, not glorified) body, 
which is (to be) broken for you, (on the cross, crucified,) 
do this in (order to cherish the) remembrance of me. 
Likewise, he took the cup, after (the paschal) supper (was 
ended,) and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them 
saying, Drink ye all of it, (of the wine, which was ordinary 
wine, that had been prepared for the Passover;) This cup 
(the wine in it) is (signifies or represents) the new testa- 
ment in my blood, (represents the new covenant ratified by 
my blood,) which is (to be.) shed (on the cross) for you, 
and for many for the remission of sins. This do ye as often 



PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 153 

as ye drink it, in (order to cherish the) remembrance of 
me. For as often as ye (reverently and devoutly) eat this 
bread and drink the wine in this cup (consecrated by 
prayer for the sacramental celebration) ye do show forth 
(perpetuate the memory of) the Lord's death, (upon the 
cross,) until he returns, (at the latter day, at the close of 
the present dispensation.) Whoever shall eat this bread 
and drink this wine unworthily, (irreverently and without 
faith and a due regard for the solemn design for which they 
were appointed,) is guilty (in respect to the) body and 
blood of the Lord, (guilty of treating irreverently or pro- 
fanely the emblems or memorials of the Saviour's broken 
body and shed blood, and thus guilty of casting reproach 
on the Lord himself.) Let a man, therefore, examine him- 
self (as to his knowledge of the design of the institution 
and his moral qualifications to receive it;) for he that 
eateth or drinketh unworthily (in an irreverent manner and 
without faith in Christ,) eateth and drinketh (judgment, 
xpj.aa, not) damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's 
body, (not distinguishing between ordinary bread and these 
elements, instituted and consecrated as emblems of the 
Saviour's crucified body and blood.) 

According to this view of the sacramental narrative, it 
follows, that in the Holy Supper of our Lord, there is, 

1. A real presence of the Saviour as to his divine nature. 

2. A spi?itual, that is symbolic presence as to his human 
nature, and, 

3. An influential presence of the God-man, the Thean- 
thropos (dsavA ?u*og) as to the blessings flowing from his 
death and mediatorial work in general. 

Hence, the view of the Lord's Supper, which is most 
scriptural, and also most generally received by the great 
majority of the Lutheran ministry and churches in this 
country, is summarily the following : 

That there is no real or actual presence of the glorified hu- 
man nature of the Saviour either substantial or influential, nor 
any thing mysterious or supernatural in the eucharist; yet } 
that whilst the bread and wine are merely symbolical represen- 
tations of the Saviour's absent body, by which we are reminded 
of his sufferings, there is also a peculiar and special spir- 
itual blessing bestowed by the divine Saviour on all worthy 
communicants, by which their faith and Christian graces are 



154 SAVIOUR'S PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 

confirmed. l The further development of the nature and evi- 
dences of the various blessings resulting from this ordinance, 
does not fall within, the design of the present discussion. 
Having thus presented the view of the Saviour's presence in 
the Holy Supper, which we find clearly taught in the records 
of inspiration, we close with the remark, that whilst we vin- 
dicate to ourselves the right to believe and profess what we 
regard as the scriptural view of this subject, we consider the 
Protestant diversities in reference to it as of minor moment, 
and can cordially fraternize with the Zwinglian and all oth- 
ers on the one hand, who attribute to this ordinance no 
peculiar spiritual blessing, beyond that of the other means 
of grace, and with the rigid adherent of Luther's views on 
the other, who believes in the real presence, the eating and 
drinking of the body and blood of the Redeemer in this 
Holy Feast of Love. 



(1) Popular Theology, 5th ed., p. 303. 



V. DISCOURSE. 



THE DOCTRINAL BASIS AND ECCLESIASTICAL POSITION OF 
THE AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 



CHAPTER I. 



Introductory remarks. Propositions defining the doc- 
trinal basis. The name Lutheran — It is given to many 
who reject the majority of the "symbolical books." 

One of the characteristic features of the Christian church, 
by which the wisdom and benevolence of its Divine Author 
are illustriously displayed, is found in the fact, that, whilst 
he himself projected the fundamental lineaments of its exter- 
nal, visible organization, he left the great mass of minor 
features, to be filled up by the discretion of his disciples in 
the successive ages of the world. It was thus, that the di- 
vine truths of his holy religion found, comparatively, easy 
access to the human heart, under all forms of civil organi- 
zation. For whilst it taught kings and emperors to rule in 
righteousness, "to be a terror to evil-doers, and a praise 
to those that do well," it simultaneously enjoined on those 
"under authority," to be "subject to the powers that be," 
as "to the ministers of God, who hold not the sword in 
vain;" because civil government is an institution "ap- 
pointed of God." Under the sanction of this discretionary 
principle, we find not only different denominations of Chris- 



156 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 

tians, characterized by diversity of external polity, but even 
Christians of the same denomination, in different countries, 
admit of these variations. Thus, the adherents of the Augs- 
burg Confession, the XVth article of which sanctions this prin- 
ciple of diversity in external arrangements, designed to 
"promote peace and good order in the church" though all 
designated by the general name of Lutheran, or Evangelical, 
are characterized by strongly marked diversities of organi- 
zation and polity. For example, whilst all Lutherans of 
every land, acknowledge the primitive parity of ministers, 
in Denmark our church has diocesan bishops, and in Sweden 
also an archbishop ; whilst in Germany she has superin- 
tendents, and in republican America, adheres to entire pa- 
rity of ministerial rank in practice, as well as in theory. In 
like manner, whilst in Luther's lifetime, no symbolical books 
at all, except the Bible, were imposed on either pastors or 
churches ; after his death, several important documents of 
historical importance, all (except the Form of Concord,) 
written for other purposes, were prescribed by the civil au- 
thorities, as binding on both pastors and churches. After 
this system of symbolic servitude had been commenced, 
more books were invested with such authority in Saxony, 
than in some other sections of Germany. In Sweden, none 
of these modern documents were regarded as strictly sym- 
bolical, except the Augsburg Confession ; and in Denmark, 
none but that Confession, and the Smaller Catechism of Lu- 
ther. The Lutheran Church in America, though pursuing 
some diversity in practice, never entered on a formal settle- 
ment of this point, until the General Synod virtually ac- 
complished this end, in her Synodical Constitution, by the 
requisition of fundamental assent to the Augsburg Confession, 
from all candidates for licensure and ordination. That 
Lutherans in this country would not be insensible, either to 
their inalienable rights or obligations, that they, would avail 
themselves of our happy liberty from all entangling alliances 
with the civil government, and organize their church more 
closely, according to the Apostolic model, than could be done 
in Germany, was natural and right. Accordingly, like their 
brethren of other denominations, our fathers did introduce 
various improvements on the ecclesiastical institutions of Lu- 
theran Europe, and adopt a system, which, whilst it is Lu- 
theran, is also American, and more nearly conformed to the 



DOCTRINAL BASIS STATED. 157 

Apostolic model, than has been attained by the Lutheran 
church in any other country. 

To portray the practice of our Fathers, the principles on 
which they acted, and the organization which has gradually 
grown out of them, is the design of this article ; as well as to 
vindicate them against the objections, which may arise in the 
minds of our friends or foes. As the subject is possessed 
of a high, enduring interest, these discussions, which first ap- 
peared in the Lutheran Observer, are now presented in this 
permanent and condensed form, entirely divested of the pe- 
culiarities in which they originated ; and they are circulated, 
not to provoke controversy, but to present calm, rational and 
scriptural argument, for the conscientious consideration of 
those concerned, with the supplication and the hope that a 
gracious Providence may employ them to cherish peace and 
harmony within our borders, to promote a Scriptural organ- 
ization of the Church on earth, and to hasten her triumph 
over the kingdoms of this world. 

We shall devote the present chapter to a statement of the 
propositions to be discussed, and to several general and pre- 
liminary topics. 

The doctrinal basis and ecclessiastical position of the 
American Lutheran Church, may be briefly comprehended 
in the following propositions : 

1. The patriarchs of our church did at first practically 
profess the former symbolical books of our church in Germany, 
by avowing them or in most instances the Augsburg Con- 
fession at the erection of their houses of worship, and in 
various cases at the induction of men into the ministerial 
office. 

2. They soon relaxed from the rigor of symbolic requisi- 
tion, and referred only to the Augsburg Confession, generally 
omitting all reference to the other former symbolic books, 
except the use of the Smaller Catechism of Luther in the 
instruction of the rising generation. 

3. Neither they nor their immediate successors ever for- 
mally adopted these symbolical books as binding on our 
church in this country, as tests of admission or discipline. 

4. About the beginning of this century they ceased, in 
fact, to require assent even to the Augsburg Confession at 
licensure and ordinadon, and demanded only faith in the 
word of God, thus practically rejecting (as they had a right 

14 



158 DOCTRINAL BASIS STATED. 

to do) all the symbolical books as tests ; though still respect- 
ing and occasionally referring to the Augsburg confession as 
a substantial expose of the doctrines which they taught. 

5. The actual doctrinal position of our church in this 
country at the formation of the General Synod, was that of 
adherence to the fundamental doctrines of Scripture as sub- 
stantially taught in the Augsburg Confession, with acknowl- 
edged dissent on minor points. Ecclessiastical obligations 
are voluntary and personal, not hereditary. God deals with 
every man as an individual moral agent, possessing certain 
unalienable rights, and owing certain unalienable duties. 
Hence the ministry and laity, that is, the church of every 
age have as good a right and are as much under obligations 
to oppose, and, if possible, change what they believe wrong 
in the religious practices of their predecessors, and to con- 
form it to the word of God, as were Luther and the other 
christians of the sixteenth century. 

6. Whatever moral obligation their practical requisition of 
assent to the Augsburg Confession, may have imposed on 
themselves and those thus admitted by them, it was annulled 
when, by common consent, they revoked that practice. 
And as none, so far as we have ever heard, protested or 
seceded, they thus all practically rejected all those books as 
binding symbols. 

7. Our General Synod found the Lutheran Church in 
America without any human symbols as tests of admission 
or discipline, although the Augsburg Confession was still 
occasionally referred to as a substantial exhibition of the 
doctrines held by them ; and the General Synod ratified the 
state of doctrine existing among its members, namely, fun- 
damental assent to the Augsburg Confession, with acknowl- 
edged deviation in minor or non-fundamental points, and 
subsequently passed a formal adoption of the Augsburg Con- 
fession, in this fundamental way, as a test of admission and 
discipline. 

The American Lutheran Church is characterized by cer- 
tain definite features, and as such is worthy of the highest 
respect and confidence of her membership, and of the 
Christian public at large. 

In regard to our first position, namely, that our earliest 
preachers often referred to the symbolical books, and especially 
to the Augsburg Confession as an expose of their doctrinal 



DOCTRINAL BASIS STATED. 159 

views, no doubt can exist, and therefore an induction of 
proofs is superfluous. And yet it seems evident that in thus 
referring, they did not design to profess an absolute con- 
formity ; because they had certainly rejected several of the 
tenets of those books, which are also at present generally 
rejected, such as auricular confession, "which is taught in 
the Augsburg Confession, Article xi : " Concerning Confes- 
sion ice teach that private absolution must be retained in 
the churches and must not be abandoned," and also Exorcism, 
which is enjoined in the Directory for Baptism, (Taufbuech- 
lein,) appended by Luther himself to his Smaller Cate- 
chism, where we find on the subject of Baptism, the following 
directions: Let the officiating minister say : Dejpa rt ( or come 
out, 'fahre aus') thou unclean spirit, and give room to the Holy 
Spirit," and after a prayer the minister says: "/adjure thee, 
thou, unclean spirit, by (bei) the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Spirit, that thou come out and depart from 
this servant of Jesus Christ, $. iV r . (naming the child) Amen." 
All these things are omitted from the liturgies and catechisms 
published by our earlier ministers, that we have seen. We 
know, too, that some of them, such as Dr. Kunze, rejected the 
imputation of Adam's sin, or rather of the depraved nature 
which ive derived from him, to his posterity as personal guilt; 
and from the general tenor of Muhlenberg's theological views, 
we doubt not he and others of them participated in this rejec- 
tion. Now these are the principal points, with the addition of 
the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist, which the 
friends of the "General Synod's basis," or of the "Ameri- 
can Lutheran church," object to in the Augsburg Confes- 
sion, (and exorcism is not even taught in that book) ; and 
we are greatly mistaken if one in five hundred of our Amer- 
ican Lutherans will ever adopt the views of Luther on these 
subjects. But if ihe early fathers of our church in this 
country had formally adopted the whole mass of the books 
as symbolical and binding on all future generations, (which 
they did not, ) the writer's views of his own position in the 
Lutheran church, and of his duty in regard to her, as well 
as that of his brethren of the General Synod, would not be 
changed in the least. His reasons are these : 

Religious and ecclesiastical obligations are not hereditary. 
In matters not prescribed by the word of God, I am bound 
by no other obligations than those which I personally as- 



160 LUTHER NO SYMBOLIST. 

sumed. I was not even requested to pledge myself to any- 
one of the symbolical books on entering the ministry, but to 
the inspired and infallible word of God. If subscription to 
the symbolical books is essential to the character of a Lu- 
theran, then Luther himself was not a member of the church 
that bore his name; and a large part of all who were called 
Lutherans during the first half century of her existence, 
were in the same condition, as well as all those entire Lu- 
theran countries, which always rejected the ill-fated Form 
of Concord. The friends of the General Synod's basis 
believed themselves acting honestly, and honorably in join- 
ing the church, then as now called Lutheran ; because they 
believed and still believe and teach all the great and cardinal 
doctrines which Luther, taught, and carry out more fully 
than he did, the. principles of church government and 
discipline, which he believed to be taught in Scripture. 

Again, if the founders of the American Lutheran church 
even had formally adopted the symbolicalbooks of Germany, 
it was equally competent for their successors to rescind such 
adoption ; and certainly could not affect our duty and position. 
It is enough for us, and for the present generation of our 
ministers and members, that when we entered the holy of- 
fice, no such obligation was customary or even thought of; 
no pledge to the symbolical books, or any one of them, was 
asked of us, or given by us. We selected the Lutheran 
church as the church of our choice, as she then was, not as 
slie had been two or three centuries ago. And, as honest 
and honorable men, we are answerable for our fidelity only 
to the promises which we ourselves made, so long as we do 
not publicly renonunce them, and avow a change of opinion 
as to our duty; as Luther did when he repudiated the ob- 
ligation of his monastic vows. It is certain our American 
fathers did not formally adopt these books, but in several 
instances practically required assent to them at licensure or 
ordination, and probable for some years longer, as we have 
recently been informed by one of the oldest fathers of the 
church, required candidate's assent to the Augsburg Con- 
fession alone, practically rejecting the other books ; and they 
did recommend the smaller catechism of Luther as a book for 
catechetical instruction ; but their successors gradually dis- 
approving of this pledge, practically rejected it, as well as 



OUR FATHERS NOT RIGID SYMBOLISTS. 161 

any pledge to the other symbolic books, about half a cen- 
tury ago, which they had a perfect moral right to do. 

All the while, those venerable brethren, among whom 
were Drs. Kunze, Helmuth, Schmidt, Streit, Sehaeffer of 
Philadelphia, Muhlenberg of Lancaster, Daniel Kurtz of 
Baltimore, Krug, Endress, Goering, Sehmucker of York, 
and Lochman,. Sen'r., though they no longer required the 
licentiate to pledge himself to the Augsburg Confession, yet 
still adhering to the grand doctrines held by Luther, con- 
sidered it honorable to retain the name of Lutheran, as 
their successors still do. Dr. Helmuth is known to have 
been prominent in rejecting the requisition of a pledge to 
the Augsburg Confession. Whether all the others, above 
named agreed with him, we know not; yet the majority 
must have done so, or the practice could not have been 
changed. 

"During the first thirty years of this century, the great 
body of the American Lutheran church had, therefore, no 
human creed at all binding upon them, though they always 
did refer (as we still do,) to the Augsburg Confession, as a 
substantial expose of their doctrines.. 

As freemen, and servants only of Christ, they felt that 
they bad the right, and rested under the obligation to wor- 
ship God, and to conduct the affairs of his church accord- 
ing to the dictates of their own conscience, guided by the 
Scriptures; and we have yet to see any evidence that they 
were under any obligation of honor or honesty, to pursue 
a different course. 

Their real doctrinal position, at the formation of the Gen- 
eral Synod, was that of fundamental agreement with the 
Augsburg Confession, and acknowledged dissent from it on 
some minor or non- f undamental points. This state of doc- 
trine alone could the clause of the General Synod's consti- 
tution be designed to perpetuate, which denies to that body 
"the right to introduce such alterations in matters apper- 
taining to the faith, &c, as might, in any way,, tend to bur- 
den the consciences of the brethren in Christ. The altera- 
tions prohibited, must have been alterations from the state 
of things and doctrines actually existing. How the "con- 
sciences of the brethren could be oppressed" by the Gen- 
eral Synod's altering or rejecting any doctrine which they 
did not believe, we cannot divine; and to maintain that the 
14a 



162 OUR FATHERS NOT RIGID SYMBOLISTS. 

framers of that article designed by it to perpetuate or shield 
from alteration any doctrine which they themselves rejected, 
would evince more zeal than sound judgment. 

This doctrinal position of substantial agreement with the 
Augsburg Confession, with acknowledged privilege of dif- 
ference on non-fundamental or minor points, was subse- 
quently made symbolic or binding by the General Synod, in 
her Constitution for Synods, and this is the official creed of 
the General Synod. This doctrinal position had been intro- 
duced in the same way and Avith exactly equivalent restric- 
tions, into the Constitution of the Theological Seminary of 
the General Synod. This obligation, written by ourselves, 
we have also taken, and to it we expect to adhere so long 
as strength is granted us to labor in the vineyard of our 
blessed Lord. It has sometimes been said, as Lutherans 
we ought to adhere to the standards of the Lutheran church. 
This is perfectly true and just, if the standards of the Lu- 
theran church in America be intended ; for these are none 
other than the "Word of God and the fundamentals of that 
Word as taught substantially in the Augsburg Confession." 
But as to the former symbolical books of the Lutheran 
church in Germany, we are under no such obligation. Our 
churches, for near a century, have not acknowledged any 
one of them except the Augsburg Confession, and for fifty 
years past have received as binding, none at all, until the 
General Synod formally adopted the Augsburg Confession, 
and that only as to fundamentals ; and probably not a dozen 
of all our American ministers have ever read all these books. 
If we ask the question, how could any one suppose us bound 
by the symbols of our church in Germany? we can per- 
ceive no other solution, than the supposition that such person 
has adopted some phase of the Unlutheran and unscriptural 
notion, which is beginning to pervade the theology of some 
other denominations, and regards the church as consisting of 
an ideal, abstract membership, together with the human Con- 
stitution, Creeds, Liturgies, &c, framed and professed by 
Christians in any particular age, and which fictitiously con- 
fers on this ideal church a corporate personality, apart from 
the individual members who compose it. In this unscriptural 
sense, a church, that is, her constitution, creeds, liturgy, <fcc, 
may be orthodox, and her actual members be infi del. But, we 
ask, will these creeds, constitutions, or abstract ideal mem- 



THE CHUKCH DEFINED. 163 

bership appear before the bar of God, to answer for the 
deeds done in the body; or the professing Christians of 
every age, who adopted or rejected them? When the apos- 
tle of the Gentiles addressed his epistle "to the church at 
Corinth," did he mean an abstract or ideal membership, or 
the creeds or regulations of the Christians in that place, or 
the houses in which they worshipped ? Let his own words 
decide the point for us. "Paul, called to be an apostle of 
Jesus Christ, &c„, unto the church of God which is at Co- 
rinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be 
saints, and to all that in every place call upon the name of 
Jesus Christ, our Lord." Here, real persons, certainly, and 
not things, are regarded as the church. In full accordance 
with this, the Augsburg Confession teaches, That the Chris- 
tian church is. nothing else than the congregation of true be- 
lievers. Art. VIII. Human creeds are a publication of the 
doctrinal belief only of those who framed and published 
them, and of those who subsequently avow their assent to 
them, either in whole or in part ; and they cannot, possibly, 
be binding on any others, who have not, by personal avowal, 
adopted them, either as an exponent of their belief, or as a 
rule of discipline. This view of the subject is clearly taught 
in the preface to the Form of Concord, where we are told, 
"Symbols cannot possess the authority of a judge in con- 
troversies, which dignity belongs only to the Scriptures, — 
but they show, how, at particular times,, the scriptures were 
understood on controverted points by the teachers in the 
church of God, who then lived, (quo modo singulis tem- 
poribus sacree literse in articulis controversis in ecclesise. 
Dei a doctoribus qm turn vixerunt, intelectse et explicate fu- 
erint) But, as this subject will be more fully considered 
hereafter, we here pass it by, and devote the remnant of 
this chapter to the inquiry : 

How much agreement with Luther, and the symbols adopted 
at different times, during half a century after the organization 
of the Lutheran church, is requisite in order honestly to retain 
the name of Lutheran? 

In the judgment of some it is necessary to believe not 
only the Augsburg Confession and Apology to it, and the 
Catechisms and Smalcald Articles of Luther, which he never 
designed as binding symbols, and which were not generally 
received as such during his lifetime ; but also the Form of 



164 SOME OF THE SYMBOLIC BOOKS 

Concord, which was not in existence till thirty-six years 
after his death. But if we listen to the judgment of every 
respectable historian of the last three centuries, who has 
treated of our church, and of the millions of acknowledged 
Lutherans, who have rejected one or more of these books ; 
we find the award of the public to be very different. 

It was doubtless unfortunate and Anti-protestant, as well 
as contrary to Luther's solemn protest, for those who agreed 
with him in sentiment, to adopt the nickname given them by 
the Papists, and to call the church of the son of God, after 
any mere man. If an inspired apostle would not suffer the 
disciples to be called after the name of Paul, or Apollos, or 
Peter, much less should the name of any uninspired leader 
be abused to this purpose, and thus practically, though un- 
consciously, be thrust in between the believer and his Lord~ 
Yet, as this has beem done, it becomes a question, whether 
those who find the church of their choice designated by this 
name, and who prefer that church on the whole, to all oth- 
ers, shall on account of that name, (a name in itself dear to 
their hearts) refuse to enter that church, or being in it, shall 
renounce their private judgment in studying the word of 
God, or form a new sect. The latter part of this alternative 
we regard as not only utterly unsustained by scripture, and 
based on a confused and pernicious over-estimate of the 
framework of sectarianism ; but also radically inconsistent 
with the scriptural views of the church of Christ. All 
history has decided against it. 

I. The Form of Concord, published 1580, was rejected 
by the following Lutheran nations, principalities, dukedoms, 
&c, and yet no one ever attempted to deny their right to the 
name Lutheran. 

1. The kingdom of Denm,arfc< " The king, though invi- 
ted to adopt it, refused to do so, by advice of his clergy, 
who disapproved of it, because psace and unity of doctrine 
prevailed in his dominions, and he feared its introduction 
would create strife and divisions. And so bitterly was he 
opposed to it himself, that he took the copy [decorated with gold 
and pearls) sent him from Germany., cast it into the fire, and 
made it a capital ofence to introduce and publish it in the 
kingdom. Kcellner's Symbolik, Vol. I, p. 575, 576. And 
though at a subsequent period it acquired some popularity, 
and was practically used ; it was never publicly acknowl- 



ALWAYS REJECTED IN EUROPE. 165 

edged as a symbol. See Baumgarten's Erlaeuterungen zum 
Concordienbuch, p. 184, 185. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist., 
Vol. III. p. 155, Murdock's edition. 

We add the testimony of Shubert's celebrated work on the 
Ecclesiastical and Educational Institutions of Sweden, as 
summarily given by Kcellner. After repeating in full the 
oath of ordination, which mentions in addition to the three 
ancient creeds, only the Augsburg Confession, and refers to 
the Liber Concordise as illustration of it, Kollner adds this 
remark : "Upon the whole, the case of Sweden Is like that 
of Denmark and of Holstein. It was from the bes;innmgr cus- 
tomary to bind oneself to the symbolical books, which were 
not adopted until after the time of the Reformation, only in 
as far us they were believed to agree with the holy Scriptures." 
In later times, it is customary in public documents, instead 
of the phrase, "the Lutheran doctrine" to use the more 
appropriate expression, "the pure evangelical doctrine" 
Kcellner's Symbolik, I. p. 122. 

2. The kingdom of Sweden did not receive it during the 
first thirteen years after its publication. Hear the testimony 
of that ultra-Lutheran historian Guericke, (Symbolik, 2d 
edition, p. 112, 113.) "And if Denmark and Sweden, 
stopping at a still more youthful age in regard to Confes- 
sions, did not concede proper symbolical authority to the 
Apology to the Augsburg Confession, or to the Smalcald 
Articles, or the Larger Catechism of Luther, (and in Sweden 
not even the Smaller Catechism,) they would naturally be 
still less willing formally to acknowledge the Form of Con- 
cord." Guericke, Symb., p. 112, 113. Still at a later 
period, in 1593, the Form of Concord received a tolerably 
formal acknowledgment, (ziemlich fonnliche Anerkennung. ) 

3. Hessia rejected it. 

4. Pomerania rejected it. 

5. Holstein rejected it for more than half a century. 

6. Anhalt ; and the cities of Strasburg, Frankfort, a. M., 
Speier, Worms, Xurenburg, Magdeburg, Bremen, Dantzic > 
&c, <fcc. Kcellner, p. 577. 

II. The Smalcald Articles, published in 1537, were 
rejected by Sweden and Denmark. In Sweden, the sym- 
bolic books generally are now regarded as an authorized 
explanation of the Lutheran faith; yet the "Symbolical 
Books of the Danish church, lately published, like those of 



166 SOME SYMBOLIC BOOKS ALWAYS KEJECTED. 

the Swedish church in 1644, (entitled Confession of the 
Swedish faith, approved by the council at Upsal in 1593,) 
contains only the three ecumenical confessions ; namely, the 
so-called Apostles' Creed, the Nicene and the Athanasian 
Creeds, and the Augsburg Confession, to which the Danish 
collection adds the Smaller Catechism of Luther. Both 
these collections, however, exclude the Smalcald Articles. 
Guericke's Symb. p. 67. and his History, p. 807, 1st editon. 

III. The Apology to the Augsburg Confession, was 
denied official symbolic authority by Sweden and Denmark. 
Guericke sup. cit. 

IV. The Larger Catechism of Luther was denied formal 
symbolic authority in Sweden and Denmark. Guericke, 
sup. cit. 

V. Even the Smaller Catechism of Luther was not re- 
ceived as symbolic in Sweden ; yet in both these kingdoms 
they are highly respected, and the Smaller Catechism, if we 
mistake not, is used for the instruction of youth. Guericke, 
p. 113. 

Here then we have the historical facts, the greater part 
of them well known indeed to those who are familiar with 
the history of our church in Europe ; but, for the benefit of 
others, proved by the authority of the accurate Koellner, 
and of that bigoted Old-Lutheran, Prof. Guericke. 

What now appears to be the result of these facts ? Did 
all these kingdoms and principalities, which are known in 
history as Lutheran, and to whom no writer, not even 
Guericlce, denies the name of Lutheran, receive all the sym- 
bolical books as such ? Far, very far from it ? We see, 
on the contrary, that whole kingdoms, especially Sweden, 
which has sometimes been held up as the beau ideal of Lu- 
theranism, never received as symbolical one-half of them ; 
though they respected and used them as theological produc- 
tions ; just as our church does in this country. In short we 
find, that the declaration of Dr. Hase, is literally true, when 
he says the Augsburg Confession is the only symbolic book, 
which has been acknoidedged by the whole Lutheran church. 
Hutterus Redivivus, p. 116, § 50. And it is certain that 
much more frequent and important deviations from the 
Augsburg Confession would have been avowed, if the peace 
of Augsburg, in 1555, had not guaranteed toleration to the 
Protestant princes only so long as they and their theologians 



DIFFICULTIES OF MELANCTHON, ETC. 167 

adhered to the Augsburg Confession; and if the Papists and 
especially the Jesuits had not watched even every verbal devi- 
ation, and used it to excite the Romish Emperor to withdraw 
his protection, and to put down Protestantism by fire and 
sword, which efforts actually eventuated in the thirty years' 
war. It is well known, that even during Luther's lifetime, 
Melancthon, Cruciger and others, disapproved of a part of 
the Augsburg Confession, and yet Luther would not naffer 
them to leave Wittenberg, or the communion of the Lutheran 
church, when they on one occasion expressed a willingness 
to do so, if they could not deviate from Luther's views with- 
out denunciation from several of his followers. In all ao-es of 
the Lutheran church, there have been among her ablest 
divines some who dissented, at least privately, from Luther's 
opinion, that the real or iruebody and blood of Christ are "pres- 
ent in the eucharist, and are received by the communicant, as 
taught in the Augsburg Confession. And Gruericke himself 
admits, what is indeed matter of general notoriety, not mere- 
ly that the neologians, but that the whole Lutheran church in 
Germany had rejected this doctrine before 1817, when the 
union of the Lutheran and Reformed churches was effected 
in some parts of that country. Even to this day, there is not 
a single Lutheran kingdom or principality, ivhich receives any 
one of the former symbolical books as binding, except the Augs- 
burg Confession, and this, as we were informed on the spot, 
only as to its substance. Now if all the world, with the 
exception of a few bigoted ultra-Lutherans, freely concede the 
name Lutheran to these millions who bear it ; it is rather 
too late in the day for a few individuals in this country to 
set up the doctrine, that no Lutheran is entitled to the name, 
who does not believe and profess the whole catalogue of the 
former symbolic books, or at least so receive the Augsburg 
Confession, as not to contradict the teachings of any one of 
the other books ! Our oivn impression of the equity of the 
case is this, that so long as the Lutheran church, in this or any 
other country, adheres to the fundamental principle of Luther- 
anism, that the Bible is the only infallible rule of faith and 
practice, and believes the great, the cardinal doctrines of Lu- 
ther's system, together with so many of his peculiarities, as to 
agree more f idly with them as a lohole, than with the peculiari- 
ties of any other denomination, she may justly retain the 
Lutheran name; and all the world, a few ultraists excepted, 



168 EARLY ABANDONMENT OF 

will cordially proclaim the equity of the designation. Thus 
also, will the Protestant churches make some approximation 
to the precept of the Saviour, who taught us : one only is 
your Master, Christ, and ye are all brethren. 



CHAPTER II. 



Early abandonment of the strict, symbolic standpoint, 
by the founders of the american lutheran cliurch. 

We now come to the second position in this discussion. 
But that our real position on the subject in general may not 
be misapprehended, it seems proper to premise a few obser- 
vations. Let it not be supposed that we are hostile to creeds 
of every description. It is indeed true, that the Word of 
God neither enjoins, nor expressly sanctions any human 
creeds. It is itself, professedly, a creed, and an inspired 
one. In it God himself has taught us what we are to be- 
lieve, and what we are to do, that is, has given us a rule 
of faith and practice. It is reasonable to suppose, that such 
a divine rule would be sufficient for all purposes, and that 
rule itself professes to be a sufficient one, " able to make us 
wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 
This is represented as the test by which the opinions of men 
are to be tried. "To the law and the testimony; if they 
speak not according to this word, it is because there is no 
light in them." And Paul declares that, if an angel from 
heaven should preach "any other doctrine than that which 
he taught," and which is recorded in his epistle, "let him 
be accursed." These facts should make us reflect care- 
fully, before we erect any other standard of doctrine, in a 
manner, which, even indirectly, or by human infirmity, 
might, in any degree, take the place of this inspired rule. 
Still, the Saviour and his apostles have prescribed certain 
requisitions to be demanded by those whom they received 
into the church, of all others who might subsequently ap- 
ply for admission. For example, applicants had to express 



SYMBOLICAL REQUISITIONS. 169 

their belief, that Jesus was the Christ, that is, the Messiah, 
<fcc. This brief acknowledgment, by frequent repetition, 
acquired a settled form, which, when it first meets us in the 
literature of the church, had grown into what was called 
the Apostles' Creed, constituting less than a duodecimo 
page ; and this is all the creed used in the Christian church 
in the whole world, so far as is known, for several hundred 
years, during the golden age of Christianity. We fully 
coincide with the judgment of the early church, thus ex- 
pressed, that for the purity of the church, and harmony of 
its operations, a creed of fundamentals is necessary, or at 
least useful, if properly employed. Yet it is evident, from 
many considerations, that it should include only fundamen- 
tals, only such doctrines as we believe necessary to the 
Christian character, together with as many points of gov- 
ernment and discipline, as are requisite for harmony in ac- 
tion. Otherwise, we destroy the unity of Christ's body, 
we violate the charity inculcated in the gospel, and wage a 
war of "doubtful disputations" with the brother, whom we 
consider "weak in the faith." We, therefore, after much 
and prayerful study of this subject, in the light of scripture 
and history, approve of the use of the so called Apostles' 
Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the fundamentals of the 
Augsburg Confession, as an expression of the prominent 
truths we believe the bible to teach, and as tests of admis- 
sion and discipline in the church. This is the ground which 
our fathers in this country practically adopted, half a cen- 
tury ago ; this is the ground which our General Synod has 
formally adopted, and the ground on which we stand. 
These several positions might be established by numerous, 
irrefragable arguments, but the present discussion does not 
properly cover this ground. 

We return, then, to our next position, that the fathers of 
our American church soon relaxed from their rigid views of 
obligation to the symbolical books. 

There are numerous reasons to authorize the belief, that 
Dr. Muhlenberg himself, the principal founder of our Amer- 
ican church, was a man of much more liberality and en- 
larged views of Christian apostolic liberty, than he has 
sometimes received credit for. As evidence of this fact, 
we will cite his liberality towards some "Separatists," as 
they are styled in Germany, before he came to America ; 
15 



170 EARLY ABANDONMENT OF 

for which he is ■censured by the historian Heinsius, who 
was a churchman of the strictest class. Speaking of our 
church in Philadelphia, he says: 1 "The Ev. Lutheran con- 
gregation in that place, has recently obtained a preacher, 
concerning whom we rather wish than can confidently ex- 
pect, that he will preserve those churches in order and in 
purity of doctrine, without divisions. This minister is Mr. 
Muhlenberg, who some time since studied at Goettingen, 
afterwards officiated as deacon inspector in the baronial 
Gersdorf-Orphanhouse at Grooshennersdorf, in Lusatia, 
and who secretly advocated the course of the Separatists in a. 
publication against Dr. Mentzer." We do not know what 
points Dr. Muhlenberg vindicated in this work, but it is 
well known that those Separatists were generally pious per- 
sons, who saw, or thought they saw, defects in the estab- 
lished (Lutheran) church, and wished to worship God in 
what they considered a purer and a more scriptural man- 
ner. This fact, however, proves that Dr. M. was a man 
who thought for himself, and disapproved of some things 
in the .Lutheran church in Germany, which were approved 
by Heinsius himself, a rigid Lutheran and a pious man. 
That Dr. M. did not regard liturgies as very important, is 
evident from the fact, that twelve years after he had been 
laboring in organizing and building up churches in this 
country, where he thought it desirable for the sake of the 
unity in public worship to compose a liturgy, he had. not a 
copy of a liturgy used in Germany, nor could one be found ; 
so that when he and his fellow laborers, Brunnholtz and 
Handschuh, undertook to form one, they had to take as its 
basis, the liturgy of the Savoy Lutheran church in London ; 
for, says he, "we had no other one at hand." 2 "That 
he did not like a long liturgy, is evident, because they pre- 
pared a short one," even shorter than "the enlarged" re- 
print of it in 1786, which is not more than half as large as 
that now in use. Nor was he a stickler for the peculiarities 
of any part of Germany, for he says; "Ave adapted it to 
the circumstances of our congregations, which had come 
from different parts of Germany. 



(1) Vol. in. page 389, of Lis Unpartheiische Kirchen Historie. Jena, 
1754. 



(2) Hall. Nachricliten, p. 676. 



SYMBOLICAL REQUISITIONS. 171 

That lie and his associates were not ardently devoted to 
the whole mass of symbolical books, is probable, as they 
are not named in their Sy nodical constitution (ministerial 
ordnung, ) so far as appears from our oldest copy, nor in their 
liturgy, except the catechism, for the instruction of youth. 
It is worthy of note, also, that the charter for the "congre- 
gations in and near Philadelphia," which was probably as 
usual in the case of such documents, written by some law- 
yer, under the direction of Muhlenberg and his associates, 
mentions not one of the symbolical books, though dated as 
early as 1765, and very extended and minute in its specifi- 
cations, covering four and a half quarto pages. That they 
were unwilling to receive as binding any of the symbolical 
books except ihe Augsburg Confession, is evident, because 
in the prominent documents in which they mention that sym- 
bol, they say nothing about the others. Thus, in the 
(Xirchenordnung) discipline of the church at Philadelphia, 
written by Muhlenberg himself, in 1762, the ministers are 
bound in the very first clause to teach according to the un- 
altered Augsburg Confession, but nothing is said about the 
other symbolical books. The catechism is subsequently pre- 
scribed for the instruction of the young. The same disci- 
pline was introduced into the church at Lancaster, unaltered. 
The same is the case in the inscription on Muhlenberg's 
church at the Trappe, dated 1743, the very next year after 
his arrival in this country, "this church sacred to the soci- 
ety devoted to the Augsburg Confession," and nothing more. 
Twenty years afterwards, he remained firm in this distinc- 
tion, and generally the other symbolical books ; for in his 
address to his congregation, he again speaks of that church 
as being founded "on the apostles and prophets and the 
unaltered Augsburn Confession," without even a reference 
to the other symbols. Can any impartial mind fail to per- 
ceive that Muhlenberg desired no other book to be regarded 
as symbolical, except the Augsburg Confession, when he de- 
signedly omits them on these solemn, official occasions? 
Again, we find another proof in an interesting diary of a 
voyage made by father Muhlenberg near the close of his 
life, to Charleston, South Carolina, found in the Ev. Review. 
In a letter which Dr. Muhlenberg addressed to Europe, re- 
questing the mission of a minister to supply the church in 
that city, he solicits one "who is able and willing to propa- 



172 EARLY ABANDONMENT OF 

gate the gospel according to the foundation of the holy- 
apostles and prophets, whereof Jesus Christ is the corner 
stone, and to administer the holy sacraments agreeably to 
the articles of our unaltered Augsburg Confession." Here, 
too, it cannot fail to be seen, that this indefatigable servant 
of Christ, again says not a word of the other symbolic books, 
and certainly if he wished or expected, that the minister who 
might be sent over, would here be required to bind himself 
to the other symbolical books also, he must necessarily have 
mentioned them, as he so distinctly specifies one of them, 
the Auosburaf Confession. But it is evident, that if the ex- 
pected minister differed from the specifications of all the 
other symbolical books on all the various points not deter- 
mined in the Augsburg Confession, he would still be such a 
minister as Dr. M. requested, and as he would not hesitate 
to ordain. Nay, further, although we do not know this to 
have been the design of Dr. M., and therefore do not assert 
it, for our cause needs no doubtful interpretations ; yet, he 
says the gospel is to be preached according to the founda- 
tion of the holy apostles and prophets, and only of the sacra- 
ments does he say they shall be administered according to 
the Augsburg Confession. 

Now, when we recollect he did not feel bound to believe 
all the minor points even in the Augsburg Confession, that he 
rejected Auricular Confession, and in all probability, as far 
as we can judge from his writings, also the imputation of 
Adam's sin to his posterity ; that he did not use the liturgy 
of Germany, but for twelve years, as it would seem, none 
at all, and then made a very "short" one; we may justly 
claim him as in principle, the father of American Lutheran- 
ism "so called." For American Lutheranism, as repre- 
sented in the General Synod, cannot with truth be repre- 
sented as a creedless system ; on the contrary, it adheres to 
the fundamentals of the gospel as taught in the Augsburg 
Confession, whilst it refuses to acknowledge as binding, the 
other books, however much they may be valued by many 
amongst us, as theological productions. 

This is, in fact, also the doctrinal standpoint of the greater 
part of Evangelical Lutherans in Germany at the present 
time. With the exception of about one hundred ministers, 
(the so called Old Lutherans,) out of seven thousand in 
Germany, none are bound to any thing more than the Augs- 



SYMBOLICAL REQUISITIONS. 173 

burg Confession, and that not to every minor doctrine in it. 
In traveling through Wurtemberg, we made particular in- 
quiry of Dr. Schmidt, the principal professor in the Theo- 
logical Seminary in Tuebingen, himself an orthodox man, 
and were informed that the clergy of Wurtemberg are obliged 
only to teach "according to the principles of the Augsburg 
Confession," (nach den Principien der Aug. Conf.) or as 
another eminent minister informed us, (nach dem Geist und 
Sinn, ) according to the spirit and import of the Augsburg 
Confession. These are the exact words as recorded in cur 
diary at the time. 

The views of Dr. Muhlenberg as above given, are in per- 
fect consonance with the statements made to us a few days 
since, by one of the most aged ministers of our church, our 
venerable father, who was admitted into that Synod in 1792, 
and has successively held the highest offices of that body. 
He asserts, that at the time of his admission, the propriety 
of requiring a pledge was a matter of doubt and debate ; 
that in some instances it was exacted and in others not ; but 
some years later it was wholly omitted ; and that Dr. Hel- 
muth, confessedly, one of the most pious members of that 
body, who was any thing else than a rationalist, and com- 
menced his labors in our church as early as 1769, was prom- 
inent in opposing the requisition of any other creed than the 
Bible. Muhlenberg himself had already been translated to 
a better world. Another highly respectable and learned 
minister of our church, who also entered the ministry about 
the close of the last century, or beginning of this, in a letter 
now before me, says: " That the exaction of a promise to 
conform to the symbolic books was ever habitual" with the 
Synod of Pennsylvania " I do not believe." It is, moreover, . 
certain that the Synod of New York, one of the oldest in 
our church, when framing her constitution, introduced a clause 
forbidding the use of any other doctrinal test than the Bible . 
If then, our fathers, who in Europe were pledged to the 
whole mass of the symbolic books, (namely, to the three 
ancient creeds, the Apostles', the Nicene and the Athamasian, . 
the Augsburg Confession, the Apology to the Confession,, 
the Smalkald Articles, the smaller and larger Catechisms of 
Luther, and the Form of Concord, ) did on their arrival in 
this country, or soon after, make a distinction between them, 
and in their Liturgies, church disciplines, and other iropor- 
15a 



174 EARLY ABANDONMENT OF 

tant official documents, if they refer to any of the symbolic 
books, mention only the Augsburg Confession, and omit the 
other confessions altogether; if they, as early as 1792, were 
divided on the propriety of exacting any other test than the 
Bible and some years later entirely omitted the requisition of a 
pledge to any of the symbolical books : if all these things 
are true, as is certain, then it must be admitted, that our 
fathers, even the oldest of them, soon relaxed from their 
rigid views of obligation to the symbolical books, which at 
that time prevailed in Germany, and with which they prob- 
ably came to this country. 

It has already been stated, that the founders of our Amer- 
ican church rejected several of the doctrines of the symbolic 
books, such as auricular confession, exorcism, the imputa- 
tion of Adam's sin (or rather of the depraved nature inher- 
ited from him,) to his posterity as personal guilt, and we 
may add, at least in regard to some of them, the lax notions 
of the Augsburg Confession on the Christian Sabbath. It 
may not be amiss to show these deviations more fully, and 
also in later days to exhibit somewhat more in detail the ac- 
tual, prevailing state of doctrine, at the time> of the organi- 
zation of the General Synod. 

Dr. Xunze, propably the most learned of our older min- 
isters, and no less distinguished for his piety, 1 than learning, 
in his history of the Christian Religion, thus expresses his 
views on the imputation of Adam's sin : " To derive original 
sin from the first man's being the federal head or represen- 
tative of the humanrace, seems not satisfactory to a mind 
inclined to derive or expect only good and perfect things 
from the good and perfect Creator. By one man's disobe- 
dience, it is true, many were made sinners, but not on ac- 
count of an imputation of -this man's sin, but because by 
him, sin entered the world." 2 And on the subject of the 
Christian Sabbath the Doctor took such high and decided 
grounds as to excite hostility and even ' persecution from 
some of his hearers. 

Dr. Lochman himself, speaking of the Article in the Augs- 
burg Confession on Natural depravity, uses this language : 



(1) See his work, "Ein Wortfuer den Verstand und das Herz passim, 
and especially p. 208-211. 

(2) Lochman's Luther, p. 88. 



SYMBOLICAL REQUISITIONS. 175 

The last clause in the above article, namely, the clause " con- 
demn eth all who are not born again of water and of the 
spirit," is thus explained by some: "If we suffer our de- 
praved nature to have the rule over us, it will certainly lead 
us to ruin and condemnation." 1 This we know, from personal 
interviews with him, to have been the Doctor's own opinion. 

The Rev. Schober, of North Carolina, though a warm 
friend of piety and active advocate of fundamental orthodoxy, 
did not receive the Augsburg Confession implicitly himself; 
and though he desired to introduce an acknowledgment of 
it into the constitution of the General Synod, did not design, 
had his efforts been successful, to require the belief of all 
its minor doctrines as a term of admission. Had such been 
his purpose, he would have excluded himself. In the edi- 
tion of the Augsburg Confession published by himself, he 
appended notes to several articles, indicating his dissent from 
them. Hear his own language on the subject of Confession 
and Absolution, (Art. xi. of Conf.) 

"This article was inserted at the time of the delivery of 
this Confession, chiefly to show a conciliatory spirit to the 
other party ; but the practice of private confession and ab- 
solution is entirely discontinued in our Lutheran churches," 
p. 107. And of course the doctrine on which it is based, is 
also rejected. 

On the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, he follows the Latin 
copy of Art. x. of the Confession, which omits the word 
true from before "body," in the German, adds the word 
"external" to emblems, which is not found in the Latin or 
German copy, and in addition to all appends the following 
note: "As Christ has promised- unto his disciples and true 
followers, that he will be with them, to the end of the world, 
and as he has been pleased to give us the gracious assurance, 
to be present with us whenever we assemble in his name ; 
how firmly' may we not rely on his promises, especially when 
we celebrate the Lord's Supper according to his holy insti- 
tution, in solemn commemoration of his sufferings and death, 
and appropriate his merits to our own hearts." But he says 
nothing about receiving the body and blood of Christ in the 
ordinance. 

But to place this matter beyond all doubt, both in regard 

(1) P. 86—88 articles. 



176 EARLY ABANDONMENT OF 

to Rev. Schober, and the ministers of the North Carolina 
Synod, generally, even as early as the year 1820, we add a 
document, adopted by that Synod at the very meeting at 
which delegates were elected, to attend the Convention at 
Hagerstown, in October of the same year, for the purpose 
of forming a Constitution for the General Synod. At that 
meeting a letter was addressed to the North Carolina Synod 
by a minister of a sister church, to which the following an- 
swer, prepared by a committee of Synod, was adopted ; and 
the Rev. Schober requested to forward it to the memorialists, 
accompanied by "a polite and brotherly address" in the 
name of the Synod : 

" To the Rev. James Hill : 

Rev. and Bear Sir, — In answer to your question, whether 
water baptism effects regeneration ? we say we- do not fully 
know what you mean by the word "effects," as it may have 
many definitions. But we say, that baptism is beneficial, 
and ought to be attended to as a command of God ; but we 
do not believe that all who are baptized with water, are regen- 
erated and born again unto God, so as to be saved without 
the operation of the Holy Ghost; or, in other words, with- 
out faith in Christ. And as to the second question, we do 
not believe nor teach, that the body and blood of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, are corporeally received along with the bread and 
wine in the Lord's Supper ; but that the true believer 
does spiritually receive and partake of the same, through 
faith in Jesus Christ, and all the saving benefits of his deatk 
and passion." 1 

Here, then, we cannot fail to see, that this whole Synod, 
(for they seem all to have been of one mind,) had aban- 
doned the ground of the Augsburg Confession, and believed 
only a spiritual presence and perception of the body and 
blood of Christ, by faith in the eucharist, and this limited, 
of course, to the believer; and especially was this the doc- 
trinal position of Mr. Schober, who was the leading and 
most active spirit in that body, and personally carried on a 
controversy with David Henkel, partly on this very doctrine. 

But still farther, to show the real doctrinal position of Mr. 

(1) See Transactions of the Lutheran Synod of North Carolina and ad- 
jacent States, for 1820, printed at Raleigh, p. 18. . 



SYMBOLICAL REQUISITIONS. 177 

Schober and his Synod, at the organization of the General 
Synod, we add another extract from the same minutes, (p. 6,) 
in which Mr. Schober, as Secretary, gives a statement of a 
discussion which occurred at that meeting, between several, 
Messrs. Henkels, and the Synod. Mr. Schober says : "They 
accused us of not teaching water baptism to be regenera- 
tion, and that ive did not accept the elements in the eucharisi 
as the true body and blood of the Lord, corporeally, and 
therefore, and because the plan for a general union ot oui 
church, (that is, the General Synod,) which they feared wc 
would adopt, was against the Augsburg Confession; they 
could not unite with us." These Messrs. Henkels, who 
had for years been associated with Mr. Schober in the same 
Synod, and well knew his views, seem to have had little ex- 
pectation, that the General Synod, which Mr. Schober was 
so anxious to establish, would have the least desire strictly 
to enforce the Augsburg Confession ; on the contrary, their 
standing charge against him and his associates was, that 
they did not hold the doctrines of that Confession. 

It has indeed been supposed that a pledge to the unal- 
tered Augsburg Confession bound its subjects to the whole 
system, taught also in all the other symbols ! ! This opin- 
ion is utterly unfounded. Nor can any authority be ad- 
duced for it. No historian has ever asserted, that an 
understanding existed in Europe, that whoever signed the 
unaltered Augsburg Confession, thereby bound himself to 
adhere to the entire system taught in all the other books. 
If such an understanding had existed, how absurd, then, 
was the custom of binding ministers explicitly to the other 
books also, which prevailed for seven hundred years, until 
the beginning of this century ? If the matter w T as so un- 
derstood, why did Sweden, and Denmark, and Prussia, and 
a number of other portions of the Lutheran church refuse 
to receive the Apology to the Confession? And why did 
the more rigid Lutherans complain of those countries, which 
received the unaltered Augsburg Confession, but rejected 
one or more of the other books, if the reception of that one 
bound them to all ? Why does even Guericke complain that 
they did not attain symbolic manhood ? In short, we can- 
not make the supposition tally with history at all, and there- 
fore, are compelled to regard it, in face, as unreasonable 
and unfounded, as it, at first view, appears to be. Guericke 



178 AUGSBURG CONFESSION DOKS NOT 

does indeed attempt to show, if we recollect rightly, that 
those who received the unaltered Augsburg Confession were 
under a logical obligation to adhere to the others, which we 
shall prove unfounded ; but the question before us is en- 
tirely different, namely, whether our fathers did not relin- 
quish the practice of requiring a pledge to the other sym- 
bolical books, and confine themselves to the Augsburg 
Confession, which is a fact to be established by historical 
evidence; 

But may it not also be- maintained, that the other sym- 
bolical books, the Catechisms of Luther excepted, were 
written to explain the Augsburg Confession, and do not 
teach any different doctrines, but only define the position of 
the church towards the Calvinists, &c, and therefore, all 
who receive the latter should receive the former also. To 
this we reply, if the other books did not touch on any ad- 
ditional doctrine, (which is, however, not the case,) but 
only dilated on those more generically stated in the Augs- 
burg Confession, they would be objectionable as binding 
creeds ; because, whilst men might agree on the few general, 
specifications of doctrine, delineated in the Augsburg Con- 
fession, they might, and would differ on many of the ex- 
planations, ramifications and amplifications of them, con- 
tained in the other books. As well might we affirm, that 
all who can agree to pledge themselves to the few generic 
specifications of the Augsburg Confession, could just as 
well adopt, as their confession of faith, that excellent and 
voluminous work, " ReinhecWs (Betrachtungen) Reflections 
on the Augshury Confession" in nine ponderous quarto vols.; 
for they are all written professedly and actually in explana- 
tion of that symbol. Or, to illustrate the point still more 
clearly, as well might we assert, that all who adopt the 
American Constitution, as all our citizens do, can just as 
well also adopt the many volumes containing explanations 
of the provisions of that constitution, written by authors of 
our several political parties. The thing is impossible. Who 
does not know that these different authors, like the several 
parties to which they belong, deduce very different, yea, 
directly contradictory views from that same instrument, 
and that they could not possibly agree ? And is it not 
equally notorious matter of history, that different writers, 
who have all agreed in assenting to the generic statements 



INVOLVE THE OTHER SYMBOLS. 179 

of the Augsburg Confession, have entertained a multitude 
of different opinions in regard to the minor specifications, 
the explanations, the circumstances and relations of those 
doctrines. 

The proten pseudos, the radical error, of the ultra-Luther- 
ans on this point, is this, that they lose sight of the difference 
between generic and specific truths. Religious, as well as 
other truths, are encircled by a vast multitude of relations 
and circumstances. Now these truths may be stated more 
or less generically, that is, in stating them, we may intro- 
duce more or fewer of those minor relations and circum- 
stances. And such is the constitution of mind conferred on 
us by the Creator, that whilst the great mass of men agree 
in a generic statement of truths, in political or religious 
science, even of truths derived from the Bible ; the more 
you enter into an enumeration of specific details, or sup- 
posed relations, the smaller the number of those, who can 
agree in them all. Thus, all denominations of Christians, 
agree to the few generic truths stated in the so-called Apos- 
tles' Creed, the only one used by Christians during the first 
three centuries. Yet, when we take up a creed of ten or 
twenty times its length, such as the Augsburg Confession, 
the 39 Articles of the Church of England, or the Heidel- 
berg Catechism, we find these same Christians differing 
concerning the detailed statements of these several symbols 
on the subject of the very doctrines generically stated in the 
Apostles' Creed. And just in proportion as we extend the 
creed by adding more specifications and relations, do we also 
increase the difficulty of its reception by others. The grand 
reason of this fact is, that these nrkior circumstances and 
relations are less clearly revealed in scripture, and in some 
instances, are mere human inferences from what is revealed, 
and also, because the human mind can apprehend some of 
these miner relations less clearly than it does the cardinal 
facts and doctrines of the gospel. From these considera- 
tions, we trust our readers will easily perceive the fallacy 
of the supposition, that whoever can assent to the more 
generic statement of doctrine in the Augsburg Confession, 
a pamphlet of something like the size of Matthew's gospel, 
c»n also necessarily adopt all the minor specifications of re- 
lations and circumstances, which are contained in the whole 



180 AUGSBURG CONFESSION DOES NOT 

mass of the former symbolic books, amounting to twice the 
size of the whole New Testament ! 

But in order, if possible, to illustrate this point still more 
clearly, we will select an example taken from the symbol- 
ical books themselves. Thus, the Augsburg Confession, in 
its third article, consisting of about twenty lines, contains a 
historical and generic statement concerning the Person of the 
Saviour, affirming his divinity, his incarnation or birth of 
the Virgin Mary, the union of his divine and human nature 
into one person, who is true God and man, his sufferings, 
crucifixion and death as a propitiatory sacrifice, not only 
for hereditary depravity, but also for all actual transgres- 
sions ; his descent into hell, resurrection, ascension to heav- 
en, his session at the right hand of God, his everlasting do- 
minion over all creatures, his sanctification of believers 
through the Spirit, and protection of them against sin and 
satan, as also his final appearance to judge the quick and 
the dead. Now, to all these statements, given in very few 
more words than we have here employed, all evangelical 
Christians can cordially assent, except the descent into hell, 
(which was not in the earliest form of the creed,) and that 
they would only wish to have changed into the world of 
spirits, which might or might not be hell. But for these 
twenty lines, the other symbolic books give us discussions 
under various captions, to the amount of from fifty to a 
hundred pages, in which they not only several times repeat 
these general positions, but also add about fifty specifica- 
tions, and related topics which are not in the Augsburg 
Confession. The major part of them were regarded as true, 
but others as erroneous. Among them are such topics as 
the following: 1. That God is man and man is God. 2. 
That the Virgin Mary did not conceive and bring forth a 
mere man but the true Son of God, and therefore, she is the 
Mother of God. 3. That it is right to say, that God suf- 
fered and died for us. 4. That it was not the mere human- 
ity of Christ that suffered. 5. That the divine and human 
natures of Christ communicate their attributes and properties 
to % each other. 6. That there are three species of this com- 
munication. 7. That Christ, in his human nature also, 
is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. 8. That he ac- 
quired omnipotent power in his mother's womb. 9. That 
thefdsh of Christ is a life-giving food, (also, ist das Fleisch 



INVOLVE THE OTHER SYMBOLS. 181 

Cliristi eine lebendigmachende Speise.) 10. That the body 
of Christ received a certain glorification and majesty, not 
only after his resurrection, and at his ascension to heaven, 
hut at the time when he was conceived in the womb. 11. 
That the one body of Christ can be present at any place in 
three different ways. We are prepared to support all these 
topics by explicit quotations from the several symbolical 
books ; but they would occupy more space than can be 
allowed. jSTow, if our readers will examine these specifica- 
tions, they will find that not one of them is contained in the 
Augsburg Confession above quoted. So we might pass over 
all the articles of the Augsburg Confession, and show that 
a vast multitude of specifications is found in the other books, 
which are not contained in the Auo-sburo- Confession. It 
will be seen, too, that some of these specifications are, to 
s'ay the least, very doubtful ; and others obviously erroneous 
and unscriptural. How it should follow, that whoever re- 
ceives the Augsburg Confession, either ought or can also 
receive or bind himself to this host of additional tenets, we 
confess ourselves at a loss to perceive. We freely acknowl- 
edge that we can neither see nor feel any such obligation, 
either logical, or theological, or ecclesiastical, or moral. 

But admitting that there is no obligation of any kind to 
receive all these books, and bind ourselves to believe their 
contents ; is it expedient, would it conduce to the glory of 
God, would it advance the interests of our church ? Most 
certainly not. As the difficulty of all assenting to any 
creed is increased just as we augment the number of minor 
and less important specifications in it; and as even the 
Augsburg Confession contains a few minor items, which the 
great mass of our ministers and laymen do not believe ; it 
would be evident folly to attempt to bind us to books con- 
taining ten times as many more such minor and doubtful 
points. The attempt would unavoidably give rise to end- 
less contentions, and must necessarily terminate in divisions 
of the church. Moreover, as our church has been signally 
blessed of God with doctrinal purity and doctrinal harmony 
under the General Synod's doctrinal basis, for more than a 
quarter of a century ; why should we not adhere to it, and 
devote our energies to supplying the destitute of our church 
over the land with the preached gospel ? If desired, let us 
add the Maryland Synod's explanation of the pledge, by 
16 



182 NO FORMAL RECEPTION OF THE SYMBOLS 

enumerating what articles are fundamental; which ex- 
presses exactly what the .pledge was intended to convey, 
The discord and diversity which have in some regions 
marred the peace of our Zion, had no reference to doctrine, 
and admit of no doctrinal remedy. They originated and 
consisted in particular measures, and especially in violations 
of our Formula of Government and discipline, lohich strictly 
forbids all noise and disorder in the worship of God. The 
remedy for these is already provided by the General Synod 
in her Formula ; let the attention of those who lament these 
disorders, where any prevail, be directed to enforcing the 
provisions of the Formula, and all will be well. At the 
same time, let them demonstrate to the disorderly, that 
their .zeal for order does not arise from want of zeal for re- 
ligion, by redoubling their efforts to promote orderly prayer 
meetings, and orderly Special Conferences, for the purpose of 
awakening and converting sinners and edifying believers, 
and thus winning souls to Christ. Let the catechetical in- 
struction of the rising generation be more faithfully attended 
to, wherever it has been neglected ; and children be taught 
to love the institutions of the church as administered in our 
own denomination. Let them be taught to love the biblical, 
liberal, spiritual features of our Lutheran Zion, and the 
days of peace and harmony among pious Lutherans, the 
days of conversions and orderly genuine revivals, where 
they have disappeared, will again return to bless us. 



CHAPTER III. 



The symbolical books of our church in Germany never 
formally adopted in this country, though practically 
used in different cases till near the close of the last 

CENTURY. 

The next position claiming our attention is, That our church 
in America has never formally adopted the symbolical books of 
the Lutheran church of the sixteenth century ; though indivi- 



BY OUR LUTHERAN FATHERS. 183 

dual congregations had acknowledged the Augsburg Con- 
fession at the erection of their churches, and in some cases 
assent to the symbols, and especially to the Augsburg 
Confession, had been required at licensure and ordination. 
By this we mean that no considerable or respectable Lu- 
theran Synod or convention of Lutheran ministers in this 
country ever passed a resolution and published it, acknowl- 
edging the authority of the former symbolical books of our 
church in Germany, or of any of them as binding on them 
and on all who would unite with their body, until it was 
done within the last few years by several German Synods 
of the West. 

1. It is true that the Governor and Directors of New Am- 
sterdam, (New York,) then a Dutch colony, had concluded 
that the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession might be tol- 
erated there, and therefore that the Lutherans might worship 
in private till they could obtain a minister. But, were these 
grave dignitaries, the Governor and Directors of New York, 
the "Lutheran church" in America, when they did not even 
belong to the Lutheran congregation ? And was their action 
the action of "our church?" And if they had even been 
Lutherans, was their resolution to tolerate worship according 
to the Augsburg Confession, a resolution to make the whole 
mass of the symbolical books binding ? Nor does the fact 
that the members of that church styled themselves "United 
members of the unaltered Augsburg Confession" prove any 
more. It shows that those members professed to believe the 
Augsburg Confession, a part of the symbolical books, one 
out of half a dozen of them, but not that even they received 
the whole of these books, much less was their giving them- 
selves this name the action of the church, or of a part of it, 
formally adopting the symbolical books as binding. 

2. Again, the Saltzburg emigrants also professed the doc- 
trines of the Augsburg Confession in Germany, and whilst 
there contracted with the Trustees of the colony, that several 
ministers should be maintained among them, to preach to 
them the word of God "according to the purport of their 
own confession," and that they should " protect them in the 
free exercise of their religion according to the import of the 
Augsburg Confession and other symbolical books of the Evan- 
gelical church:' Now, although this latter phrase, and i( other 
symbolical books" of the Evangelical church, was not of their 



— 



184 CASE OF THE GERMAN, 

own selection, but was contained verbatim in the offer or 
invitation sent from England to Rev. Ursperger to induce 
emigrants to go to Georgia, and accepted by them; still admit- 
ting that these emigrants who were nearly all " farmers or me- 
chanics, day-laborers or domestics," had all seen and read 
all the symbolic books, which is certainly a very liberal conces- 
sion, what does it prove ? It establishes the fact that these 
emigrants professed the doctrines of the symbolical books in 
Germany, and intended to adhere to the same faith in this 
country, a point T?hich we have already asserted of the 
early Lutherans in general. But were these Saltzburgers, 
when in Germany, the Lutheran church in this country, or 
even as yet a part of it ? And could this contract, which 
they formed there, with any propriety be adduced to prove 
that our church in this country, or even that they, when they 
subsequently became a part of it, passed a resolution, or 
took any public step formally adopting the symbolic books 
as binding on their churches here ? Certainly not. 

3. In regard to the founders of our church in Pennsyl- 
vania, the facts in the case incontestably prove that "our 
church never formally adopted" the symbolic books, that is, 
that no synod or convention ever passed an act declaring the 
symbolical books binding on themselves, and to be required 
of all who wished to unite with them. The question, 
whether the patriarchs of our church adopted these sym- 
bols formally, or substantially, is immaterial in reference to 
our present duties. The obligation of the present genera- 
tion of our ministers, both in honor and religion, depends 
simply on the question, whether they individually bound 
themselves at their licensure or ordination, to receive any 
other symbol than the Bible. If not, then, by no course of 
legitimate reasoning can a mass of human productions, twice 
as large as the whole New Testament, be imposed upon 
them, as binding on their consciences. 

4. As to the little handful of Swedish Lutheran churches, 
— they have long since been swallowed up by the Episcopa- 
lians, and there is not even a single congregation of them 
that has retained its Lutheran profession. However pious, 
and noble-minded and liberal, some of their ministers were, 
they were the servants of their ecclesiastical superiors in 
Sweden, from whom they derived their subsistence and un- 
der whose instructions they acted, to which they no doubt 



DUTCH AND SWEDISH LUTHERANS. 185 

conformed, But they never had the right formally to resolve 
to accept or reject the symbolical books, unless they wished 
to lose their support, which was paid from Sweden, and be 
dismissed from the Swedish churches. It is undoubtedly 
true, that the instructions sent from Sweden, to Governor 
Printz, directed that the worship of the church of the colony 
should be conducted, according to the symbolical books and 
usages of the Swedish church. But we certainly need not in- 
form the reader, that their ecclesiastical superiors in Sweden 
were not the Lutheran church in America ; nor is it supposable 
that these Swedish ministers after their arrival in this coun- 
try, ever formally adopted a resolution that the symbolic 
books should be regarded as binding on them, for that was 
a matter of course. Still, it should not be forgotten, that 
the Swedish church in Europe did not receive any other 
Lutheran symbol than the Augsburg Confession, and Lu- 
ther's Smaller Catechism : so that these Swedish churches 
on the Delaware also certainly rejected all the other books. 
On the whole, then, it appears that not one of all these cases 
bears on the point, whether the Lutheran church in this coun- 
try ever formally adopted the symbolical books or not, except- 
ing the several individual cases of ordination, in which a 
pledge was in fact required. And in several of these the 
specific contents of the pledge are not known, though they 
doubtless embraced the Augsburg Confession, and possibly 
also the other symbolical books. These cases prove the 
practical adoption of at least a part of the symbolical books ; 
but do not touch the formal adoption of either a part or the - 
whole by our American church. 

In corroboration of this position, we add a few remarks . 
It is reasonable to suppose, that if the founders of our 
American church, had formally adopted even the Augsburg 
Confession alone, or all the symbolic books, at any synod or 
convention, they would have recognized these books as 
symbolic in some part or other of their liturgies or synod- 
ical constitutions. But in their liturgy of 1786, even the 
Augsburg Confession is no where mentioned, much less the 
other symbolic books ; excepting a direction that Catechu- 
mens shuold study Luther's Catechism. In the liturgy of 
1818, there is a formulary for ordination, containing the - 
prayers, address, and even the questions proposed to the 
candidates; but neither the Augsburg Confession nor any 
« 16a 



186 CASE OF THE GERMAN, 

other symbolic book is even named in it. Only in the. foraa 
for the consecration of churches is the Augsburg Confession 
referred to. But the study of the Catechism is enjoined, as 
was also the case in the former edition, and at Confirmation, 
in one of the formularies, the subjects profess fidelity to the 
doctrines of Jesus, according to the professed views or con- 
fession of the Evangelical church, though neither of the 
symbolical books is named. 

Again, if a synod or convention of the early ministers of 
our church, had ever passed a resolution formally to adopt 
the symbolical books, and to require assent to them, at 
licensure or ordination, would it not necessarily be seen in 
the constitution of the Synod subsequently published, in 
which the rights, duties, &c, of licentiates and ordained 
pastors, as well as the rules for Synodical and ministerial 
business are contained ? We have two editions of the con- 
stitution of the Synod of Pennsylvania, ("Ministerial Ord- 
nung.") The oldest is a reprint of an earlier copy, and was 
published in 1813 ; but that from which it is copied, proba- 
bly belongs to the former century. At all events, it seems 
to belong to the period prior to 1805; for it contains a reso- 
lution appended, passed June 12th, 1805, and "ordered to 
be incorporated with the constitution," which must therefore 
have existed before it. No notice is given in this edition 
that any alterations had been made in the constitution itself, 
nor is it styled a revised edition. Yet in this early constitu- 
tion, not a word is said of requiring a pledge, oral or writ- 
ten, to all or any one of the symbolical books. Since then 
not one of the symbolical books is even named in the de- 
tailed formulary for ordination in the liturgy of 1818, though 
the questions to be answered by candidates are there given, 
and nothing is said on the subject of ordination in that of 
1786, and since the same is the case in' the constitution 
(Ministerial Ordnung) of the Synod of Pennsylvania, dating 
back at least to within five years of the last century, al- 
though the rights, duties, &c, of licentiates and ordained 
ministers, as well as the rules for synodical and ministerial 
business, are contained in it, it seems certain from the 
present state of the evidence, that this respectable, ancient 
and mother Synod of our church never did formally adopt any 
of the symbolical books, as a test of licensure or ordina- 
tion ; and that their actually having required such a pledge 



DUTCH AND SWEDISH LUTHERANS. 187 

in various cases in practice, was done by the tacit consent 
of all parties, it being conceded by all that the symbolical 
books, and especially the Augsburg Confession, contained, 
with the exception of a few minor articles, a correct expose 
of the doctrines which they held. 



CHAPTER IV. 



Actual abandonment of all symbolic requisition at the 
commencement of this century, and virtual recognition 

' only of the augsburg confession as to the funda- 
MENTALS of God's Word. 

We pass on to our fourth position : 

4. That, about the beginning of this century the fathers of 
our church ceased, in fact, to require assent even to the Augs- 
burg Confession at licensure and ordination, and demanded 
only faith in the word of God, thus practically rejecting (as 
they had a right to do) all the symbolical books as tests; 
though still respecting and occasionally referring to the Augs- 
burg Confession as a substantial expose of the doctrines which 
they taught. 

The literal truth of this position, that all requisition of 
assent to any creed but that one furnished by the Holy 
Ghost, in the Scriptures given by his inspiration, was aban- 
doned about fifty years ago, is not denied. That, about 
the beginning of this century the custom of requiring as- 
sent even to the Augsburg Confession, which had been ob- 
served in several instances, was wholly relinquished, is just 
as certain as that General Washington died near the close 
of last century, or that Thomas Jefferson was elected Presi- 
dent in the first year of the present one. Numerous living 
witnesses yet remain to attest the fact, and it cannot be suc- 
cessfully denied. 

But, it has been supposed by some, that the abandon- 
ment of the practice of requiring a pledge of assent to these 
books, does not remove our church from the historical basis 
of these symbols/ 



188 THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION 

A shrewd observer of human nature once remarked, that 
u names are things;" and things they doubtless are in the im- 
portance of their results, although in the language of the 
schools, they are but signs of our ideas. It cannot be de- 
nied, a large portion of mankind, learned and unlearned, 
are often deceived by the mere indefinite or figurative use 
of words. Of this we have a striking example in the opin- 
ion under consideration, namely, that our church was 
founded on the historical basis of these symbols, and there- 
fore the practical rejection of them by the church subse- 
quently, cannot remove her from this basis. A brief analy- 
sis of this opinion will demonstrate its fallacy. By our 
church is meant the members who constituted it at any par- 
ticular time, and hj our church at the period of its founda- 
tion, is to be understood the mass of its members at the 
time of their organization into a regular ecclesiastical so- 
ciety in this Western world, and not their successors in any 
other age. To be historically founded, signifies to be founded 
in history, that is, to be proved by events which are matters 
of historic record. What, then, are the historical facts con- 
nected with the organization of our church as recorded in 
history ? They have constituted the topics of a large por- 
tion of the discussions in these articles, and are briefly 
these : That the founders of our church, who probably had 
assented to the symbolical books in Germany, also in vari- 
ous informal ways avowed their belief of those doctrines 
here — that in several cases they required assent to one or 
all of these books at licensure and ordination, and at the 
erection of church edifices, — but that they never formally, 
that is, by a resolution of Synod, adopted any of these 
books as symbolical or binding, as tests of admission or dis- 
cipline — and that subsequently, about the close of last 
century, whilst some of the earlier ministers were yet lin- 
gering on the stage of action, and mingling in their coun- 
sels, they wholly relinquished the practice of requiring 
assent to any thing but the Bible. Now was there any 
thing in these events binding future ages ? Nay, did not 
these devoted men practically decide, by ceasing to use and 
thus practically rejecting the sj^mbolic authority of these 
books, that they themselves were not bound by their own 
previous action, after they ceased to regard it as proper? 
In short, there is a difference between history and prophecy* 



ALONE VIRTUALLY AVOWED. 189 

The one relates only the past, the other the future. A his- 
torical basis involves no obligation on future ages, other 
than they approve and voluntarily assume. Thus did Lu- 
ther reason. He well knew that the errors and superstitions 
of Rome were "historically founded" in the decrees of 
councils, bulls of popes, the Romish missal, &c. But did 
he say, "therefore I must not oppose them? Or, if I wish 
to advocate other views, I must withdraw from the church 
thus historically founded on these errors ?" Every tyro in 
history will answer no. He began to inveigh against these 
corruptions because he regarded them unscriptural, and he 
persevered in doing so for years, without the least thought 
of withdrawing from the church, until he saw that he was 
to be excommunicated., and then he committed the papal 
bull to the flames, and renounced all connexion with the 
church of Rome. As genuine disciples of Luther, we, 
therefore, recognize no binding authority in the "historical 
foundation" referred to, as depriving us, in any degree, of 
our natural and individual obligations and rights. 



CHAPTER V. 



The voluntary and personal nature of ecclesiastical 
obligations: and the obligation of the church in 
evert successive age to conform her confession to the 
word of God. 

The position no vv claiming our attention is the fifth in the 
series, as formerly enunciated : 

5. That ecclesiastical obligations are voluntary and personal; 
and not either hereditary or compulsory. Hence the church, 
that is, the ministry and laity of every age, have as good a 
right, and are as much under obligation to oppose, and, if 
possible, to change ivhat they believe wrong in the religious 
practice of their predecessors and to conform it to the word of 
God, as were Luther and the other christians of the sixteenth 
century. 



190 NATURE OF ECCLESIASTICAL 

In order fully to appreciate the truth and force of this 
position, we must recur to first principles. What, then, is 
the church, whose obligations we are discussing? In a 
former chapter we showed, that in the view of the inspired 
Paul, the " Church" consisted of persons, not of things ; 
and of individuals, not of an abstract, ideal, corporate per- 
sonality. He describes it as embracing "those that are 
sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that 
in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." 
1 Cor. i. 2. In full accordance with this is the view of 
Luther, who defines the church to be "the congregation, 
number or assemblage of all christians in all the world, who 
are the only bride of Christ and his spiritual body." \ Me- 
lancthon says the visible church is the " ccetus vocatorum 
seu profitentium evangelium," the assemblage of the called, 
or of those who profess the Gospel. The New Testament 
introduces us to a number of such churches, as that at Jeru- 
salem, at Corinth, at Ephesus, atEome, &c. From all that 
is said of these churches, the following points are indispu- 
tably established, as well a's by other evidence from Scripture 
and reason : 

1 . That the church is no where spoken of as an abstract, 
corporate mass, or an ideal body possessing substantive person- 
ality apart from its members at any time constituting it, 
according to the Puseyite or Romish notion ; nor as serving 
as a reservoir to contain all the spiritual influences vouch- 
safed by God to his children, and dispensing them through 
her officers and sacraments to the applicants. Nor do they 
speak of the church as possessing or being capable of pos- 
sessing any character such as being faithful or unfaithful, 
orthodox or heterodox, that is sound or unsound in the faith ; 
except as these attributes are applicable to the persons then 
constituting the Church. Nor do they tell us that the 
church at Jerusalem had one confession of faith, and the 
church at Antioch, or Rome, another and a different one. 
Much less do they utter the remotest intimation that if the 
persons constituting the church in any particular age or 
country see fit to devise a human system of organization, 



(1) Ich glaube dasz erne heilige christliche Kirche sei auf Erden, " das 
ist die Gemeine und Zahl oder Versammlung aller Christen in aller Welt, 
die einge Brout Christi und sein geistlicher Leib." 



OBLIGATIONS. 191 

consisting of confessions, liturgy, discipline, <fec, as was first 
generally done by the successors of Luther, about fifty 
years after the publication of the Augsburg Confession; 
that their doing so places the church, that is, professing 
christians, in after ages, under the least obligation to adopt 
such human system, unless they believe it accordant with 
the principles and instructions of God's word. And as to 
any such creed being established bj civil government, and 
enforced by civil disabilities, it is an outrage alike upon the 
rights of man and the character of the Protestant church. 

2. We find each of these churches spoken of as a church 
of Christ, not as part of a church, or as having only a part 
of the privileges and duties belonging to his church on earth. 
Nor do we find that those churches were bound together by 
any external stated bond of union ; nor that in the apostolic 
age the churches were connected together into any synod- 
ical associations as at present, much less into different 
denominations on the grounds of differences in doctrine or 
forms of government and worship. Hence, if the inspired 
apostles knew what is essential to the valid organization of a 
church of Christ as well as their uninspired successors do, 
it is obviously preposterous to suppose that any thing essen- 
tial was left wanting by them ; or that churches by asso- 
ciating into synods or denominations, are in any sense 
more perfectly churches of Christ than was each such indi- 
vidual local church in the apostolic age ; or that they in the 
sight of God possess any higher privileges or authority. 
Still, on the ground of human expediency, Synods and Gen- 
eral Synods may be and are highly useful ; if they do not 
impose a yoke on individual churches, but as in our Ameri- 
can Lutheran system of government, act chiefly as advisory 
bodies. The principle of such union for advisory counsel 
and co-operation, is given us in the primitive council held at 
Jerusalem ; and the churches in every age are at liberty to 
employ it, as far as experience proves it useful and safe. 

3. Each individual member of the Church is bound to search 
the Scriptures, and to believe and act for himself. It was for 
pursuing this course that the apostle Paul applauded the 
Bereans ; and it was not only to the apostles, but to his 
hearers generally that the Saviour addressed the command, 
" Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eter- 
nal life, and they are they which testify of me." In short, 



^™ 



192 NATURE OF ECCLESIASTICAL 

reason and scripture combine to teach us that God deals with 
every individual as a moral agent, possessed of certain ina- 
lienable rights, and obligated to certain inalienable duties ; 
and the right and duty of private judgment in matters of 
religion are so universally conceded as essential principles of 
Protestantism, that it were superfluous to spend time in 
establishing them. 

But this principle of individual responsibility and of obli- 
gation to individual action is still further established by the 
fact, that in the day of retribution, when we shall all appear 
before the judgment-seat of Christ, He will judge and dis- 
pense his retributions to every one according to the deeds 
done in Ids body. ISor is the principle of personal imputa- 
tion admitted at this grand assize. Here our temporal situ- 
ation is often affected by the conduct of our parents, and in 
this way the sins of parents are often visited on their chil- 
dren to the third and fourth generation. But there, when 
the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father, he 
will reward every individual "according to his works." 
" The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither 
shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. But the soul 
that sinneth, it shall die." It therefore follows unavoidably ; 
that our ecclesiastical, us well as other obligations, from the 
observance or neglect of which these rewards and punish- 
ments result, are also personal and not hereditary, are vol- 
untary and not compulsory, which is the point of our 
proposition. 

4. As every church is hut a collection of such professed 
believers, each of whom is under immediate responsibility to 
God to make the word of God the paramount and only infalli- 
ble rule of his faith and practice, it follows, that as a church, 
they are all under precisely the same obligations, in the dis- 
charge of all associated religious or ecclesiastical duties. 
Hence, if the members of a church find, a human creed, 
professed by their predecessors, it is their duty individually 
and collectively to compare it with the scriptures, and if 
found erroneous, or of injurious length, to have it corrected 
by the infallible standard. 

Again, though the churches may co-operate in any arrange- 
ment or association, not inconsistent with the precepts and 
spirit of the scriptures, such as synods, councils., societies, 
&€., if experience proves them favorable to the advancement 



OBLIGATIONS. 193 

of religion ; yet must they always be watchful, not to forget 
or renounce any of their individual and inalienable rights. 
Thus churches may adopt an expose of their scriptural 
faith, long enough to exclude fundamental errorists, as did 
the christians of the second, third and fourth centuries, in 
receiving the so-called Apostles' Creed and the Nicene 
Creed. But we cannot believe it justifiable in any church, 
to adopt such extended creeds as include numerous articles 
of doctrine not necessary to harmonious co-operation among 
acknowledged christians, and as rob the members and min- 
isters of the church of that individual liberty in searching 
the scriptures, which is our inalienable right. If our prede- 
cessors in the church, with which we are providentially con- 
nected, have adopted creeds, some parts of which we cannot 
believe to be scriptural, it is our duty to publish our dissent 
from such creeds, as well as our agreement ; and if we dif- 
fer on points which we regard fundamental, to reject such 
creeds altogether. This is the view of duty entertained and 
pursued by that highly respectable and active portion of our 
American Zion, the Congregationalists of New England, in 
the reception of the Westminster Assembly's Catechism and 
Confession of Faith. Says the Rev. Dr. Woods, late Pro- 
fessor of Theology in Andover Seminary, in his letters to 
Unitarians, " As it is one object of these letters to make you 
acquainted with the real opinions of the Orthodox in New 
England, I would here say with the utmost frankness, that 
we are not perfectly satisfied with the language used on this 
subject in the Assembly's Catechism. Though we hold that 
Catechism, taken as a whole, in the highest estimation, we 
could not with a good conscience subscribe to every expres- 
sion it contains, in relation to the doctrine of original sin. 
Hence, it is common for us, when we declare our assent to 
the Catechism, to do it with an express or implied restric- 
tion. We receive the Catechism generally, as containing a 
summary of the principles of Christianity. Again, the im- 
putation of Adam's sin to his posterity, in any sense which 
those words naturally and properly convey, is a doctrine 
which we do not believe," (though taught in that creed,) — 
pp. 44, 45. Thus the New School Presbyterians also dis- 
believe the limited extent of the atonement, agreeing with 
the Lutherans and Congregationalists in the belief of its 
universality ; and they also freely profess their dissent on 
17 



194 NATURE OF ECCLESIASTICAL 

this point from their Confession of Faith. Exactly the same 
is the manner in -which the churches of the General Synod 
receive the Augshurg Confession, namely : with the express 
restriction of its binding authority to the fundamentals of 
the gospel, and the admission of difference on unfundamental 
points. So far from our case being in this respect unprece- 
dented, it is sustained by the example of the two most 
respectable sister denominations of our land. And this is as 
it should be. The church, that is professing believers, should 
alter, limit, or reject what is in their judgment unscriptural 
in the creed, and not the unscriptural creed eject the mem- 
bers from the church. Or in other words, in the language 
of our proposition, it is the duty of the church in every other 
age as much as in that of the Reformation, to reform or re- 
ject what they believe unscriptural in the religious practices of 
their ancestors, and to conform their own to the infallible word 
of God." 

Our sixth proposition naturally flows from the preceding : 
6. Whatever moral obligation the practical requisition of 
assent to the Augsburg Confession by our fathers, may have 
imposed on themselves and those thus admitted by them, it was 
annulled, when, by common consent, they revoked that practice. 
Our duties are not created by our opinions of them, but 
arise from the nature of things, and from the relations we 
sustain to the various beings in the universe. Hence, whilst 
it is reasonable to expect us to retain a practice, so long as 
in our opinion it is obligatory ; if we change our opinion, it 
is equally proper, that we should relinquish it. It is also 
admitted, that good men ordinarily do what they regard as 
obligatory on them ; hence their habitual conduct is a fair 
index of their views of duty. When, therefore, our fathers 
under the influence of the views they brought from Europe, 
at first practically required assent to the Augsburg Confes- 
sion, it is a just inference that they believed it their duty to 
do so. With these views of duty, they and those to whom they 
administered this pledge, were under obligations to adhere 
in the ministrations of the sacred desk, to all the contents 
of this symbol. This course the christian public had a right 
to expect them to pursue, until they professed a change of 
opinion. But it is equally certain, and for exactly the same 
reasons, that whenever they did change their opinion of the 
propriety of such a course, not commanded in scripture, and 



OBLIGATIONS. 195 

did in fact publicly abandon the practice of requiring any 
other test than the word of God ; they in like manner thus 
published to the world their altered conviction of duty, 
which change absolved them and all persons subsequently 
admitted, from any such obligation in the view of the pub- 
lic, on the ground of consistency. The reasons in both 
cases are found in the positions above established, that it is 
the duty of the church, that is, of christians, in every age, 
to search the scriptures, and to act out the honest convic- 
tions in which such investigation results. To suppose that 
the practical observance of a custom, not enjoined in scrip- 
ture, could impose obligations, which a change of opinion in 
the same persons, or in those succeeding them, could not 
annul, and from the observance of which an equally public 
practical rejection of it, would not release us in the eyes of 
the christian community, is contrary to all sound reason, as 
well as the ethical principles of scripture. 

7. In perfect accordance with the principles here evolved, 
was the practice of the Great Reformer. He was trained up 
in the doctrines and usages of the church of Rome, he found 
them sanctioned by the authority of popes and councils, and 
confirmed by the practice of many centuries. To crown 
the whole, he had voluntarily obligated himself by an oath, 
when he was created Doctor of Divinity, "to obey the church 
of Rome, and not to teach any doctrines condemned by her.*' 
Nevertheless, when in the providence of God he became 
acquainted with the Scriptures, and his continued study of 
them taught him the errors of Rome, he fearlessly began 
the work of Reformation, and in disregard of councils, popes 
and the holy mother church, and even of his own oath, 
which he now regarded as null and void, he prosecuted the 
work of reform within the church, and when he found this 
a hopeless enterprise, finally anticipated his excommunica- 
tion by renouncing the church, and commenced an indepen- 
dent organization. Numerous passages might be cited in 
which he avows the principles involved in this course of 
action, and necessary to its justification. 

Nor was Luther guilty of the inconsistency of desiring to 
impose upon others the yoke which he had indignantly cast 
off. Never did he wish any human composition, either of 
his own or others, to be made symbolical, or binding on the 
church. Nor was the symbolic system introduced into the 



196 THR EXAMPLE OF LUTHER. 

church during his lifetime, nor until more than a quarter 
of a century after his translation to a better world. But, 
has not the contrary been supposed to be the case ? It has, 
and therefore it may hot be amiss to correct the 'error. The 
true origin of the symbolic system of servitude is thus 
fairly stated by Dr. Kcellner, in his Symbolik, (Vol. I. pp. 
106, 107:) "The symbolical books, (as they were after- 
ward styled,) were first merely an expression of what was 
believed ; afterwards they became the rule of what must be 
be believed. But where and how this was first done by 
public authority, it is very difficult to determine. The 
traces and evidences of it are often fallacious ; because cases 
in which such subscription to a creed was merely requested 
and voluntarily given, may easily be adduced as cases in 
which the subscription was commanded. It, however, ap- 
pears to be true, that some individual symbols had so much 
authority attributed to them, as to be recommended as rules 
of faith and of instruction, and in some instances also com- 
manded, long before the formation of the Form of Concord, 
(which was half a century after the publication of the Augs- 
burg Confession.) Nevertheless this does not appear every- 
where to have occurred at the same time, and in the same 
manner ; nor does the principle of binding men to the sym- 
bols, seem to have been a universal and prevailing one, 
prior to the formation of the Form of Concord, (i. e. 1580,) 
or before the prevalence of the controversies which origin- 
ated from its formation. But a change took place about 
the time the Form of Concord was "composed, and on ac- 
count of its formation, and after it. Prior to this time, some 
cases had occurred, of oppressive coercion' in matters of 
faith, and of compulsory adoption of the symbols as a rule 
of faith and instruction ; but afterward they became more 
numerous." These positions he sustains by numerous au- 
thorities, which even fix the precise times, when, at differ- 
ent places, the custom of demanding assent to these symbols 
was first introduced. That distinguished historian, Dr. 
Schrceck, bears the following testimony as to the time when 
the custom of requiring assent to the symbolical books was 
generally introduced in the electorate of Saxony. "This 
oath, (says he,) was not prescribed in electoral Saxony until 
after the time of the Form of Concord, when Christian 
II., in 1602, (more than half a century after Luther's death,) 



THE EXAMPLE OF LUTHER. 197 

prescribed it. Subsequently, in 1661, (more than fifty years 
later still,) the civil government required it so generally, 
that throughout the electorate of Saxony all preachers, 
schoolmasters and officers at court or elsewhere, were re- 
quired to assume this obligation." Here we perceive that 
although theological professors had been required to pledge 
themselves to the Augsburg Confession at an early day, as 
we stated on a former occasion, yet no such pledge was re- 
quired of the ministry in general, until half a century after 
the Augsburg Confession was practically acknowledged as 
the expose of Lutheran doctrine, even in the electorate of 
Saxony itself, the residence of Luther, and the head-quarters 
of the church. Schroeck, sup. cit. vol. IV., pp. 470, 471. 

It seems evident, then, that the habit of ascribing nor- 
mative or binding authority to these books, though, in a 
few instances, it was done at an early day, was of gradual 
growth, and did not become general for half a century after 
the Augsburg Confession was published and used as a profes- 
sion or expose of faith, and many years after the death 
of Luther. But could this be the case if Luther had 
from the beginning, or at anytime during his life, desired 
that these books should possess this binding authority? Or 
if this had been his wish, as it was so partially done, would 
he not have expressed his desire on this subject ? Yet his . 
work-s contain no passage of such import. On the contrary, 
Luther repeatedly expressed his opposition to having his 
works regarded as binding upon the consciences of others. 
In his instructions to the visitors in the Electorate of Sax- 
ony, he uses this noble language: "Nevertheless, we can- 
not suffer this,, (book of instructions,) to go forth as rigid 
commands that we may not issue new Popish decretals, (auf 
daz wir nicht neue Peepstliche Decretales aufwerfen,) but 
only as a historic description, and also as a testimony and 
Confesssion of our faith," not mere ceremonies and forms 
of worship.) In his well-known passage, protesting against 
his followers being called Lutherans, he expressly declares : 
"I will be no one's master, (Ich will keines Meister seyn.)"" 
In his "Preface to the first part of his German works," 
written in 1589, only seven years before his death, (vol. 14, 
p. 420, Walch's ed.,) he- says : " Gladly would I have seen 
all my books neglected and lost." " This was also my opin- 
ion (or design meinung) when I began the translation of 
17a 



193 LUTHER'S CATECHISMS. 

the scriptures themselves, that I hoped there would be less 
writing done, and more studying and reading of the Scrip* 
tures. For all other writings (or publications) should lead 
us to the Bible, as St. John to Christ, (John iii. 30,) in or- 
der that each one might for himself drink out of the pure (or 
fresh) fountain. For neither the councils, nor the fathers, nor 
we ourselves, can, by our best and most successful efforts, make 
as good work as the Scriptures, as God himself has made." 
"Well, then, (since, as he had just said, he could not 
prevent the republication of his works, ) I make the friendly 
request, that whoever desires, at present, to possess my 
works, (and he makes no exceptions of those which have 
since been made symbolic,) shall by no means allow them 
to hinder him from studying the Scriptures themselves, but 
shall regard them as I regard the decrees and decisions of 
the popes and the books of the sophists ; that is, occasionally 
to examine them and see what they have done, or to calcu- 
late the history of the times ; not that I regard it a duty 
to study them, or to practice what they taught" Other 
passages of similar import might be added, but these we 
would fain hope are sufficient to confirm the positions of 
Koellner. and to show that Luther never wished any of his 
books to "be binding on others." That he desired his cat- 
echisms to be used as books of instruction, is natural and 
proper. It was for this purpose that he composed them. 
But, that he wished them to be regarded as symbolical, as 
binding on all who should belong to the same religious de- 
nomination, is quite another thing, and requires very differ- 
ent, yea, positive evidence. 

But, if all the above evidence, so satisfactory in itself, 
were obliterated from the pages of history, the very lan- 
guage of Luther in his preface to the Smaller Catechism, 
should, we think, settle it forever. Not only does it not 
contain a syllable about his wish, that it should be regarded 
as binding ; but the reverse. In this preface, (Baumgarten's 
Concordeinbuch, pp. 614, 615,) he deplores the ignorance 
of the people, urges the importance of elementary instruc- 
tion, and begs those ministers who could not make better ones 
themselves, to use these forms and tables, i. e. the catechisms 
which he had prepared. (Jjiite ich euch — welche es nicht 
besser vermaegen, diese Tafeln und Form vor sich zu nehmen.) 
And urging the importance of adhering to the very same words 



LUTHER'S CATECHISMS. 199 

in teaching the populace the decalogue, the Lord's prayer, 
the Apostles' creed, the sacraments, <fcc, he says : There- 
fore select what form you choose, and adhere to it perpetually, 
(Darum erwsehle welche Form du wilt, und blieb' dabey 
ewiglich.) Again, after the pupils have committed to mem- 
ory~the text, as he terms it, that is, the decalogue, Lord's 
prayer, &c, he urges the ministers to explain the import of 
them, and for this purpose, he says: "Take again before 
you, (that is use,) these tables, or some other short method, 
whichever you please, and adhere to it, (Nim mabermal vor 
dich, dieser Tafeln Weise, oder sonst ein Jcurze einige Weise, 
welche du wilt, und bleib dabey.) Now all these quotations 
are Luther's own declarations, prefixed to the very catechism 
in question, and if they do not, especially in connexion with 
the mass of other evidence here adduced, utterly preclude 
the idea of his having wished his catechism to be regarded 
as symbolical, and as binding on the Lutheran church, we 
confess our inability to estimate the force of evidence. 

That our estimate of the facts and evidence in the case is 
correct, is admitted by the ultra-Lutherans themselves, as 
we will prove by a quotation from Professor Guericke, show- 
ing that even he does not suppose that Luther designed his 
catechisms to be symbolical. 

" As Luther's catechisms (says he) were not prepared in 
consequence of any public resolution, so also they did not 
attain symbolical authority by formal subscription to them, 
but rather by tacit consent. They introduced themselves 
into use every where, especially the smaller one, by their 
pure and animated simplicity and unsurpassable practical 
concreteness. Moreover, the Form of Concord, also, for- 
mally and unequivocally, avows them, after they had pre- 
viously been received into several Corpora Doctrinee (or 
collections of Confessions of Faith)." Symb. p. 102. Now 
if Guericke had supposed that Luther had designed these 
catechisms to be symbolic, would he not have said so when 
he was speaking of their origin and the manner in which 
they acquired symbolic authority, and admitting that they 
were not declared symbolic by any ecclesiastical authority, 
prior to that of the Form of Concord, fifty-two years after 
they were written. In perfect accordance with this view is 
the testimony of Koellner. " Therefore, in just acknowl- 
edgment of their importance both for doctrine and religious 



200 DOCTRINAL POSITION 

practice, they were received into the Corpora Doctrinse ; and 
this importance and existing general use also received the 
public sanction of the church, inasmuch as symbolic authority 
was given them in the Form of Concord, and thus secured 
to them." Symbolik, I. p. 51 1. It seems therefore evident 
that the symbolic authority, even of these catechisms, was not 
acknowledged by any act of the church, till the time of the 
Form of Concord, long after Luther's death. 



CHAPTER VI. 

The actual doctrinal position of our church at the time 

OF THE FORMATION OF THE GENERAL SyNOD, WAS THAT OF 
ADHERENCE TO THE FUNDAMENTALS OF SCRIPTURE AS SUB- 
STANTIALLY TAUGHT IN THE AuGSBURG CONFESSION, WITH 
ACKNOWLEDGED AND PROFESSED DISSENT ON NON-ESSENTIAL 
ASPECTS OF DOCTRINE. 

That the position here affirmed, namely, that of agreement 
in fundamentals with the Augsburg Confession, together 
with acknowledged dissent on some minor points, fairly rep- 
resents the doctrinal position of our principal Synods, espe- 
cially of the mother Synod of Pennsylvania, and of those 
connected with the General Synod, we know from extensive 
intercourse with, them, both personal and epistolary. We 
believe there are a very few ministers in the Synod of Penn- 
sylvania who hold the doctrine of the bodily presence, &c; 
but we have yet to hear of one that desires to force these 
views upon his, brethren. . In corroboration of our opinion, 
we shall, I. Present general statements concerning the doc- 
trinal position of our church during the last quarter of a 
century. II. Adduce more specific testimony in regard to 
individual synods and persons, especially the Synod of North 
Carolina and Rev. Shober and Storke. III. Prove by the 
declaration and acts of the General Synod herself that she 
has always held the same- position. We begin with the tes- 
timony of one of our most aged and respected divines, Dr.. 



OF THE CHURCH. 201 

Hazelius, whose partiality for church history is well known, 
and who has enjoyed unusually favorable opportunities of 
acquaintance with the views of our church in the Northern, 
Middle and Southern States. 

1. Dr. Hazelius. In the Annotations on the Augsburg 
Confession, prefixed to the " Discipline, &c, of the Synod 
of South Carolina," (pp. 20-23,) Dr. Hazelius says : "That 
Luther and the Reformers who labored with him, entertained 
the idea of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, is 
undeniable ; but it is also well known, that the sentiments 
of Luther concerning the real presence of Christ in the Sup- 
per have not always been fully received in the Lutheran 
Church. Melancthon departed from them, and many of our 
divines of the seventeenth century, otherwise strict adher- 
ents to the doctrines of Luther, moderated the expressions 
of the great Reformer in such a manner that few Protestant 
christians of any other denomination could well find fault 
with their explanation of the manner in which they repre- 
sented to themselves and taught the presence of Christ in 
the Eucharist." 

"The opinions, (continues Dr. Hazelius,) now entertained 
in the Lutheran church as to the nature of the sacrament of 
the Lord's Supper, differ in no material point from those enter- 
tained by the other Protestant churches on the subject. We 
believe that Christ instituted this sacrament as a means of 
spiritual communion with him, as the invisible head of the 
church, and which is to be statedly observed, until the saints 
are admitted to personal communion' with him in heaven. 
In it, the christian commemorates with devout feelings the 
sufferings and death of Christ. By means of this ordinance 
the christian renews his faith, and receives the spiritual 
blessing which the Saviour has promised to impart to all 
worthy communicants. The body and blood of Christ are 
set forth in this ordinance, as the spiritual food of the 
soul," &c. 

"If, however, (proceeds the Doctor,) any of our brethren 
should entertain sentiments apparently more conformable to 
the views and language held forth by the Augsburg Con- 
fession, and other writings of the first Reformers, we do not 
desire to disturb them in that opinion, inasmuch as we know 
that the main point in this, as in every other religious ob- 
servance, is the heart," &c. "At the table of Christ, 



202 GENERAL SYNOD'S ESTIMATE 

they (Christians differing on minor points,) may forget their 
minor differences and commune in sweet and endearing fel- 
lowship with each other and their Lord." In this quotation 
the italics are our own ; and we doubt not the interest of its 
matter will fully justify its length. 

These sentiments, to which we cordially assent, are fully 
endorsed by the Synod of South Carolina, by whom the 
volume containing them is officially published for public use 
in their churches. The action of the Synod also shows the 
fallacy of the inference, that the publication of the Augs- 
burg Confession by the Hartwick Synod, or one of its min- 
isters, implies a belief of all its contents, or a desire or even 
willingness to make it binding in any other manner than we 
contend for, and than is secured by the General Synod in her 
Constitution for Synods. For the same volume which fur- 
nishes us the above extract, also contains the Constitution 
of that Synod, in which the Augsburg Confession is avowed 
as the bond of union in the following terms : 

Art. II. " The Augsburg Confession of Faith shall be the 
point of union in our churches, inasmuch as we believe that 
the fundamental doctrines of the Word of God are taught 
in a manner substantially correct in the doctrinal articles of 
said Confession." In this sense all the Synods belonging to 
the General Synod, have received this Confession, and in 
this sense alone, we confidently believe, would any one of 
these bodies be willing to accept it. 

It has been conjectured by some that there has of late 
years been a recession from the more rigid confessional 
ground assumed by that body at its formation. Now, it so 
happens, that we were present in Baltimore in 1819, when 
the Rev. Schober first proposed his plan for a General Synod, 
which was very much like that of the Presbyterian General 
Assembly. We were present at Hagerstown in 1820, when 
the Constitution was definitely formed and adopted ; and 
we heard with much attention all the debates in both meet- 
ings. We have been present, either as member or visitor, 
and for many years as chairman of the Hymn Book Com- 
mittee, at the meeting of every General Synod, save one, 
that has ever been held ; we were intimately acquainted 
with those elder members of that body who have since been 
called to their rest, such as Drs. Endress, Lochman, Geis- 
senhainer, and Mr. Schober, and we think we ought to 



OP THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 203 

understand the real views and plans of that Synod, as fully as 
any man in our church. Now we can assure our readers, 
that instead of a retrograde movement, actual progress has 
been made in an opposite direction. Our own views coin- 
cided, in general, with those of Mr. Schober. We regretted 
the failure of his efforts to have the Augsburg Confession 
substantially recognized, or even named in the Constitution 
of that body ; and after the lapse of some years we our- 
selves accomplished the very thing, by introducing it into 
the Constitution for Synods. To this substantial recognition 
of the mother symbol of Protestantism, the General Synod 
still adheres. It is all her most zealous friends ever desired, 
and I trust that is all that the enlightened friends of religion 
and of our church will ever admit. Our own views of this 
subject have never changed. And the Professorial oath of 
office in our Seminary, though written by us as early as 
1825, is in exact conformity with this position. We made it 
express exactly what we thought right, and what we still 
think every Professor of a Lutheran Seminary ought to be 
pledged to ; and it is substantially the same that is required 
by the Constitution for Synods at licensure and ordination. 
Instead, therefore, of retrogression, there has been approxi- 
mation to the Augsburg Confession, in the General Synod 
since her formation. And the alleged recent growth of a 
more lax system among the members of the General Synod, 
is a gross misapprehension of the truth, as is well known 
to those who personally participated in the transactions of 
that body from the beginning. 

And why should we, after the additional experience and 
light of more than three centuries, feel any reluctance in 
departing from some of the minor doctrines of the Augs- 
burg Confession ; when it is certain that its very author, 
Melancthon himself, did so; yea, that Luther, the great 
founder, not of our religion indeed, for which we look to 
Christ, but of our organization as a denomination, did the 
same ? For, in his Smalcald articles he denounces the mass 
as "the most horrible abomination of popery," though it had 
been "in a measure defended in the Confession," especially 
in the abuses mutati, or articles concerning the corruptions 
of the church. Why should we feel any reluctance, when 
even the secular authorities, the Protestant princes them- 
selves, directed their theologians to re-examine the Augsburg 



204 TESTIMONY OF DR. HAZELIUS. 

Confession by the inspired word of God, and alter anything 
that might be found inconsistent with that only infallible 
rule ; and all this seven years after that Confession had 
been published and translated into various languages, and 
circulated over all Europe ? 

" If, therefore, (we again quote the judicious and appro- 
priate words of Dr. Hazelius,) every departure from the 
literal sense of the Augsburg Confession, amounts to a der- 
eliction of Lutheranism, it is certainly a source of congratu- 
lation and joy to those who have thus departed, that Luther 
and Melancthon have set them the example. Those heroes 
of the Reformation never intended that christians should 
follow them in all respects, for even they differed among 
themselves in regard to some opinions concerning the Lord's 
Supper ; but they demanded that christians should prayer- 
fully study the Bible and consider the authority s of that 
book as paramount to all human wisdom and philosophy." 

"On this broad basis of Protestantism the American 
Lutheran churches are still standing; charitable and liberal 
in matters of minor importance, they are willing to aid in 
leveling down the partition walls, which are now separating 
Protestant from Protestant." This latter sentiment, so con- 
genial to the millennial glory of the church, is fully expressed 
in the General Synod's Constitution, and itself dissipates the 
contracted delusion, that the founders of that noble institu- 
tion' desired to recall to prominent attention, the sectarian 
peculiarities of our church, by restoring the obsolete authority 
of her enormous symbols. "The General Synod shall apply 
all their powers, their prayers and their means toward the 
prevention of schisms among us, to be sedulously and inces- 
santly regardful of the circumstances of the times, and 
of every casual rise and progress of unity of sentiment among 
christians in general, in order that the blessed opportunities 
to promote concord and unity, and the interest of the Redeem- 
er's kingdom, may not pass by neglected and unavailing." 
Art. Ill,' § 8. Such was the exalted, the truly apostolic 
design of our General Synod, and it were easy to demon- 
strate that her action in the promotion of Christian union in 
general, as well as unity in our own church, has been 
perfectly accordant with the principle thus avowed. 

2. Dr. C. Undress. Our next proof is taken from a very 
interesting, though extended letter of the Rev. Dr. Undress, 



TESTIMONY OF DR. ENDRESS. 205 

one of the ablest, most distinguished and influential among 
our oldest divines. He entered the ministry about the year 
1794, an wielded an important influence in our church as 
one of its leading spirits until his decease in 1827. He was 
an able expounder of the word of God, a learned and en- 
lightened theologian. He also richly merits the grateful 
remembrance of our church as one of the most active and 
controling founders of the General Synod. As the letter, 
which was addressed to Rev. J. P> Schindel, senr., Lancas- 
ter, dated -Ouly 25th, 1821, is somewhat miscellaneous in its 
contents, we shall barely allude to some of its topics and 
then cite the portion more directly bearing on our subject. 
Dr. E. speaks with the highest respect of the different forms 
or symbols of the Lutheran church, as theological compo- 
sitions, excepting the Form of Concord, concerning which 
■his sentiments cannot well be mistaken: "We have the 
Formula Concordiae, in which expulsion, condemnation, 
anathema were, in the most liberal manner, pronounced and 
poured forth against all those who were of a different opin- 
ion, which, however, thank God, was never received univer- 
sally by the Lutheran church. I would suffer both my hands 
to be burned of before I would subscribe that instrument" 

The Dr. also asserts what we have repeatedly affirmed, 
that the Augsburg Confession, like the other symbols, (ex- 
cept the Formula Concordise,) was never intended by its 
authors to be used as symbols to bind the consciences of 
others, says "the Lutheran church existed in parts of Ger- 
many for thirteen years, and was established throughout 
Saxony six years, and in Prussia, Moravia, Sweden and 
Denmark, several years before even the Augsburg Confes- 
sion was written" — "During this time they distinguished 
themselves as Lutherans by peremptorily and absolutely re- 
fusing to receive o v acknowledge, as a confession of faith, the 
writings and dictates of man." This book alone (the Bible) 
should be and should remain the foundation of their faith." 

Dr. Endress then quotes the opinion first of Melancthon, 
and secondly, of Luther, as follows : 

"Here they say : Shall there be no visible judge in the 
church, and what avails the judgment if it have no power 
from the judge? "To this we give this sufficient answer : 
It is God's will that there should be visible courts in the 
church, that they should be truly upheld, as it is written : 
18 



206 TESTIMONY OF DR. ENDRESS. 

Be Ecclesia, and it is not God's will that blasphemy or any 
erroneous doctrines should be suffered to be propagated." 

"And this visible judge is the church, i. e. pious ministers 
and others ; this visible judge is, however, strictly bound to 
God's Word, for these are things from God, and are con- 
tained in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles. There- 
fore shall no creature — no angel — no man — no pope — bishop 
— minister, &c, set up articles of faith or confessions against 
God's Word or separated from God's Word — nothing new 
nor different from the Holy Word of God." 

"Against this the philosophers and wise men of the world 
say, the Scriptures are uncertain, and are interpreted and 
explained by one portion in one way and by others in a dif- 
ferent way : for this reason the visible judge should have 
persons to decide." 

I could not have expressed Melancthon's opinion better in his 
own words, than I have done in mine, before the Synod, with- 
out seeing the above. What he says further in his long 
dissertation, amounts to this : That councils and synods may 
confess for themselves. Their confession, however, is not 
binding upon others ; but the Scriptures are binding upon 
all, and that they should oppose false doctrines ; but should 
not judge them according to the opinion of councils, synods, 
or confessions of faith, but according to Holy Writ. 

You shall now hear Luther's opinion, for fear you might 
think this was only Melancthon's, although that would be 
sufficient for the attainment of my object, because he wrote 
the Augsburg Confession. Luther himself says : 

" On the other hand, to judge of doctrinal matters, &c, 
we must not care for precepts of men, i. e., for things setup 
by men, for laws, antiquity, custom and usage, whether it 
be of the pope or the emperor, or prescribed by the princes 
or bishops, and approved by the half or whole of the world, 
&c. For the soul is an immortal thing, and must be gov- 
erned only by the Eternal Word, and for that reason we 
must act agreeably to God's Word. If then the Word of 
God and the doctrines of men are to govern the soul togeth- 
er, then will they unquestionably fight and war against each 
other. This we will abundantly prove by the following: 
The word and doctrines which men have set and ordered, 
we should leave to the judgment of bishops and learned 
men and councils, (synods ?) what they say should be con- 



TESTIMONY OF DR. ENDRESS. 207 

sidered by all the world as law and articles of faith. Behold 
what honor ! how indecent and foolish ! It operates against 
the law and word of God." 

" For Christ establishes plainly the contrary, and takes 
this right and power to judge of doctrine from the bish- 
ops, the learned men and councils, and gives it to every one 
and all christians in common. John x. 4, 5, 8. " The 
sheep follow him ; for they know his voice. And a stran- 
ger will they not follow — for they know not the voice of 
strangers. All that ever came before me are thieves and 
robbers ; but the sheep did not hear them." Here you see 
plainly who has the right to judge of doctrine. Bishops, 
popes, learned men and all others have power to teach ; but 
the sheep shall judge whether it be the voice of Christ or 
that of a stranger. Friend, what can these water- bubbles 
say who continually cry, Councils ! Councils ! You must 
hear the learned ! and you must look to old customs and 
established ways ! Do you suppose that the word of God 
shall give way to your old customs ? No — never ! For that 
reason we leave bishops and councils to conclude and set up 
what they please ; but where we have the word of God we 
shall stand with that and not with them — they must give 
way to us and to our word." 

Here you see Luther's opinion. Did he not then show 
the difference between him and the Romanists sufficiently ? 
At that time there was no confession written — but only the 
Scriptures. Dear brethren, if we hold to the Bible truly, 
sincerely, and conscientiously, we will not be Romish, nor 
Cs«* 7 inistic, nor Zwinglians, nor Socinians, nor Quakers, nor 
Methodists; we shall distinguish ourselves from them all ; 
nor will we condemn any one on account of mere opinion ; 
we shall, to be sure, find with us and among us tares and 
that until the harvest comes. The Lord will, however, never 
permit the true church to go down by misinterpretations of 
the Bible — " for the foundation of God will stand sure and 
has this inscription : " The Lord knoweth them that are his." 
As we have (says Dr. Endress) hitherto received the 
Augsburg Confession, and Luther's Catechism, and Melanc- 
thon's Apology, so I have no objection that they should be 
kept in the same reverence and respect as our 'peculiar doc- 
uments ; hut not to overrule the Bible. For by this shall the 
Lutheran church for ever distinguish itself from all other 



208 TESTIMONY OF DR. ENDRESS. 

religious connections, that the Bible — the Bible alone shall 
remain the only sun in Christ Jesus, and that we rest upon 
human declarations of faith only in so far as they receive 
their light more or less from that great light. 

Dr. E. then speaks with the utmost respect of the different 
symbolic books ; and closes in these words : 

"What shall I answer on the question: What is the 
confession of faith of the Lutheran church ? Answer : I 
will not dictate to you what you should say ; but if I should 
be asked, I would say, first, and principally, and solely, and 
alone, the Holy Word of God contained in the writings of 
the Prophets and Apostles. The confessions of faith by the 
church, of the first four centuries, we hold in conformity with 
the Bible, and receive them, as far as I know, universally in 
the Lutheran church. The confession of the princes of the 
German empire, presented at the Diet of Augsburg, is held 
by all in honor and respect, and when we compare it with 
other human confessions, we give it a decided preference. Lu- 
ther's Catechism is used in all Lutheran churches, and no 
catechism of other religious denominations has that honor. 
The so called apology is in possession of very few Lutheran 
ministers ; but whether they have read it or not, they con- 
sider it a good book. The Smalkald Articles I have often 
read. In Germany they are taken up among the synods. I 
know not whether any other divine in the Lutheran church 
in America ever read it except Muhlenberg and Lochman. 
In short we hold firmly and steadfastly to our beloved Bible, 
when the one holds to Calvin, the other to Zwingel, a third 
to the Heidelberg Catechism, a fourth to the Confesssion of 
the Synod of Dort, a fifth to the Westminster Catechism, a 
sixth to the common-prayer book, a seventh to the solemn 
league and covenant, and the eighth to the darkened and 
depraved reason, per se, the ninth to reason, under the name 
of Holy Spirit, and the tenth to the devil himself in the form 
of an angel of light. But I will cleave to my beloved Bible, 
and hereby it shall remain. Amen." 

3. Rev. Dr. Bachman, in his excellent discourse on the 
Doctrines and Discipline of the Lutheran church, preached in 
1 837, by appointment, before the Synod of S. Carolina, and 
published by said body, says " The articles of the Augsburg- 
Confession, contain the fundamental principles of our faith." 
p. 10. 



TESTIMONY OF DRS. BACHMAN, LINTNER, 209 

"In fact, the Lutheran Church has, for a century past, 
ceased to agitate this question, (i. e. concerning the presence 
and reception of the body and blood of Christ at the eucha- 
rist) — leaving its members to follow the dictates of con- 
science agreeably to the light of Scripture. This we are 
authorized to do without a departure from the creed of our 
church ; since, at our ordination, in this country especially, 
we only profess to believe "that the fundamental articles of 
the word of God, are taught in a manner substantially cor- 
rect, in the doctrinal articles of the Ausburg Confession." 
p. 24. By publishing this discourse, which the committee 
of Synod justly style, "able, lucid and learned," the breth- 
ren of that Synod naturally designed to publish to the world 
their approval of its views, which are precisely accordant 
with what we have pronounced to be the standpoint of our 
American Lutheran Church, fundamental agreement with the 
Ausburg Confession, with acknowledged difference on minor 
or non-fundamental points. 

4. Rev. Dr. Lintner, of Hartwick Synod, "New York, 
together with Rev. Messrs. Crownse and D. Eyster, and 
Messrs. Borst and Springer, as a committee of said Synod, 
in the preface to their edition of the Ausburg Confession, 
published 1837, say: "The Evangelical Lutheran Church 
in the United States, profess to adhere to the Ausburg 
Confession. The General Synod has adopted it as a doc- 
trinal standard ; although it does not require the ministers 
and churches in its connection, to believe every sentiment it 
contains on those unessential points, which caused so much 
contention when it was first adopted." From the pledge 
which the Constitution requires as licensure and ordination, . 
(which is then reported,) " It will appear, that we are not 
bound to receive the unessential points of the Confession. 
All that is required is, an acknowledgment, that on essential 
points of doctrine, it agrees with the word of God. And 
this we do believe. We hold, that the fundamental truths 
of the gospel, and the essential doctrines of salvation, are 
correctly set forth in the Ausburg Confession ; and in this 
declaration the committee know that they agree with the body 
of the Lutheran Church in the United States." — p. 3, 4. 1 

(1) This respected brother has recently published an article exhibiting 
the advantages of having a creed, in opposition to some few persons in Life 
18a 



210 KRAUTH, KURTZ AND MILLER. 

5. Rev. Dr. Krauth, about the year 1 ! 830, when residing, 
in Philadelphia, prepared for a new edition of Buck's The- 
ological Dictionary, an accurate and impartial, though very 
brief sketch of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the 
United States, in which he gives precisely the same view of 
our church. " The doctrines of the Evangelical Lutheran 
Church (says he) are substantially those of the Confession 
of Ausburg. The doctrine of the Trinity, as held by those 
who differ from Arians and Socinians, a vicarious atonement 
made by the passion and death of Jesus Christ, the deprav- 
ity of human nature, the necessity of conversion produced 
by the Holy Spirit, the resurrection of the body, and a future 
state of rewards and punishments, eternal in their duration, 
may be specified as the cardinal doctrines of this creed" Here 
the reader will perceive the same general view of our doc- 
trinal position ; and the doctrine of the bodily presence of 
the Saviour in the eucharist is very properly not included 
among the articles regarded as "cardinal" or fundamental. 
See Luth. Observer for 1831, p. 86. 

6. Rev. Dr. B. Kurtz, when entering on his duties as 
editor of the Observer in 1 833, in his introductory expose 
of his principles, after affirming the Evangelical Lutheran 
Church to be the church of his choice, adds the following 
views of his duties as a Lutheran : " "While, therefore, he 
(the editor) regards the sacred Scriptures without note or 
comment, as the only infallible rule of faith and morals, he 
at the same time holds the prominent doctrines of the Refor- 
mation, as substantially set forth in the Augsburg Confession, 
and will consider himself bound, according to his best abili- 
ties, to defend and promote them." See Observer for August 
24, 1833. 

7. Rev. Dr. S. B. Miller, Professor of Theology in Hart- 
wick Seminary, New York, in his discourse preached before 
the Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of the State of New 
York, in 1831, uses the following language: "No one, com- 
petent to judge, will deny, that it (the Augsburg Confession) 
contains the two following propositions : That no one who 
should die without having received baptism, can be saved ; 

vicinity, who oppose any, even the most temperate use of creeds. That 
article, taken in connection with his opinions here expressed, exhibit the 
Dr. as an enlightened friend of a creed of fundamentals, which is the 
ground of the General Synod. 



TESTIMONY OF DR. REYNOLDS, 211 

and that in the Lord's Supper, we actually, not symbolically, 
or figuratively, but actually receive the body and blood of 
Christ ; the same body that was slain, the same blood that 
was shed on the cross. Now, few of our ministers, and few 
of our people, I am bold to say, in this country at least, hold 
such a belief." — p. 8. Here again,, one of the oldest and 
most respectable ministers of our church testifies, that the 
great mass of our ministers and laymen, have abandoned 
several prominent doctrines of the Augburg Confession, 
one of which was formerly ranked among the distinguishing 
doctrines of the Lutheran Church. A very few of our 
ministers have gone so far as to advocate the propriety of 
rejecting all human creeds. Among these is our esteemed 
friend, Professor H. I. Smith, of New York, then of Hart- 
wick Seminary. In a discourse, delivered before the Synod 
of New York, in 1834, he says : " The authority of the New 
Testament is sufficient for me, without requiring the sanction 
of either Lutheran or other creeds," &c, <fec. Yet this 
sentiment has never obtained much currency among the 
ministers of the General Synod. 1 They at once fixed on the 
medium position as desirable, fundamental agreement with 
the Augsburg Confession, with liberty of difference from it 
in n on -fundamentals, and to this almost the whole mass of 
our ministers and churches are wisely determined to adhere. 
8. Rev. Br. Reynolds. Our last individual testimony on 
the general aspect of our subject is from an interesting and 
excellent letter of Dr. Reynolds, penned ten years ago for 
the Lutheran Observer, when he forwarded to the editor his 
translation of the letter of Dr. Endress, an extract from 
which we presented on a previous page. We take pleasure 
ia adding: that Dr. R. now agrees with us in re-o-ardino: the 
Augsburg Confession as a necessary symbol of our church, 
and we trust his continued reflections on the subject will 
also lead him to favor such a liberal use of it as Dr. Endress 
recommends. On this scriptural, and rational and primi- 

(1) It is but justice to Dr. Smith, to state that, more mature reflection 
led Mm to forsake this latitudinariau ground, and to place a high value on 
the use of symbols. It is true, he has now gone further than is in our 
judgment, consistent with true christian and apostolic liberty of conscience; 
yet we doubt not the generous impulses of his heart, and the further 
investigation of the subject, will lead him to the juste milieu, to the liberal 
ground of the inspired apostle, "A brother that is weak in the faith receive 
thou, but not to doubtful disputations.' 5 



212 TESTIMONY OF DR. REYNOLDS. 

tively Lutheran ground our entire American Lutheran Chureh 
could be happily united. "The formation of the General 
Synod (says Dr. R.) marks an epoch in the history of the 
American Lutheran Church, for it was there she first fairly 
declared her distinctive character. Hitherto she had been 
slowly growing up, in individual congregations and in sepa- 
rate synods, in accordance with her original genius and with 
the free spirit of the institutions of that country to which 
she had now, for more than half a century, been so happily 
transplanted. Now, however, she came together, as one 
body, animated by one spirit, to enter upon and labor in 
that wide sphere allotted to her. I say she came together, 
for although two synods still stood aloof, the great mass of 
the church in America was there united, and a moral union 
was formed even with those fragments which could not at 
once be blended into one harmonious whole. And although 
two synods soon after withdrew, in obedience to the blind 
impulse of a powerful element admitted into the new system, 
but not then, nor even now, perfectly assimilated to it, or 
put into its proper relation to it ; I mean the popular prin- 
ciple, or Congregationalism, yet these two bodies continued 
in heart integral parts of the union, as was shown by the 
speedy return of the one, and the frequent efforts of the other 
to do the same thing. But when in their separation from 
the General Synod the great mass of the brethren have 
still co-operated with it and made it a virtual bond of union. 
Dr. Undress' letter and the constitution of the General 
Synod tell us the form which the Lutheran church assumed 
at this important period. She did not cut herself loose from 
her Germanic stock and form — the one faith of the church 
of all ages, by a schism atical separation from it and rejection 
of its doctrines. Neither, on the other hand, did she 
slavishly bind, herself to the doctrines and discipline, the 
liturgy or the symbols of any particular branch of the 
church, whether national or provincial. She duly appre- 
ciated the freedom which she had attained by being eman- 
cipated from the thraldom of the state by which even the 
bold spirit of Luther himself, much more that of his suc- 
cessors, in every part of Europe, had been fettered and 
arrested in its onward career. We might verify this in every 
part of the American church organization, but for the pres- 
ent we confine ourselves to her action in regard to the 



TESTIMONY OF DR. REYNOLDS. 213 

symbolical books. These she neither rejected nor received as 
an absolute rule of faith. Hence we find in the constitution 
of the General Synod no action whatever in regard to them, 
although Art. III., Seo. 3, takes it for granted that our doc- 
trinal views are based upon them, when it requires synods 
uniting with it to " hold the fundamental doctrines of the 
Bible as taught by our church" So when the General Synod 
afterward drew up a constitution for Synods, it merely 
required ministers to declare their belief that " the funda- 
mental doctrines of the Bible were set forth in a manner sub- 
stantially correct in the Augsburg Confession. Nor did the 
delegates who formed the General Synod misrepresent their 
constituents. On the contrary these were then and still con* 
tinue to be the sentiments of the Pennsylvania and New 
York Synods, which then embraced the great mass of our 
ministers and churches. The Pennsylvania Synod, partic- 
ularly, never required subscription or assent to the symbol- 
ical books, nor was the least disposition manifested by it to 
change its ground when, in 1841, it revised its Ministerial 
Ordnung. But what is still more remarkable and significant 
in this matter is, that in the liturgy drawn up by a joint 
committee of the Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio Synods 
and adopted by those bodies, as also by the Synods of East 
and West Pennsylvania, and recommended by the General 
Synod to all the Synods in its connection, there is no refer- 
ence either in the formula for licensure or in that for ordination 
to any obligation of the ministry to teach according to the sym- 
bolical boohs. 

Has the American church then ceased to be Lutheran 
because she does not subscribe to the Augsburg Confession 
and other symbolical books? God forbid! for then would 
she have denied the truth that Luther revived and confessed, 
viz., the Bible as the only infallible exposition of God's will 
and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, as the sole ground of 
justification. But I need not dwell upon this, as it is the 
object of Dr. Endress' letter to show what it is that specifi- 
cally distinguishes Lutherans from all other branches of the 
church. No one, I think, can doubt that he has clearly 
shown that the symbolical books are not necessary for this 
end. 

There is one idea that seems to have been before Dr. 
Endress* mind, which, however, he has not brought out as 



214 REV. SHOBER, STORK AND 

clearly as he might have done, and no doubt would have 
done, had any one impugned his views — I mean the power 
of the church in all ages to make and publish her own con- 
fession of faith. Luther and his compatriots were perfectly 
right in proclaiming their faith as they have done in the 
Augsburg Confession and the other symbols. It is a noble 
testimony which they bore and do still bear to the truth. 
But they could not — they did not confess for us, their suc- 
cessors. It is true there is a communion of faith among the 
saints of all ages, but that does not consist in these written 
creeds, however true and excellent they may be. It is a 
living principle which may exist under various external forms 
and may speak itself forth in very different language. And 
there is likewise a historic connection between the church 
of all ages, and in reference to this we are prepared to show 
that the American is a true daughter of the German church* 
as reformed by Luther himself." 



CHAPTER VII. 



Specific testimony concerning individual Synods and Dr- 
vines of the general synod, showing their doctrinal 
position to be that of agreement with the augsburg 
Confession in fundamentals, and acknowledged dissent 
on some minor points. 

We promised -to adduce additional, specific testimony, 
in regard especially to the Synod of North Carolina and 
Rev. Messrs. Stork, Shober, the Messrs. Sherers and J. 
Reck, who were among its principal members. As Mr. 
Shober was confessedly prominent in desiring some recog- 
nition of the Augsburg Confession at the organization of the 
General Synod, it has been erroneously inferred, that at least 
he and his Synod, received that symbol without restriction, 
and desired its unrestricted recognition by the General Synod. 
This we proved to be all fabulous in our former series ; yet 
as it is an important point in the argument, we add other 
irresistible proof. So far from yielding implicit assent to the 



NORTH CAROLINA SYNOD. 215 

Augsburg Confession, much less to the other former sym- 
bolical books of our church in Germany, Mr. Shober for 
years carried on a controversy with the Henkelites, who 
confessedly received every thing found within the lids of 
the whole Concordeinbuch. In 1821, the very year of the 
first meeting of the General Synod, Mr. Shober published a 
work against David Henkel, who was the leader and princi- 
pal writer as well as disputant of the Tennessee Conference, 
under the title of " Review of a pamphlet published by Da- 
vid Henkel," &c, containing 64 pages, 8vo, from which we 
extract the following passages, showing the light in which 
Mr. Shober, Stork, &c, viewed the doctrines of the ubi- 
quity of Christ's glorified body, taught in the Form of Con- 
cord, and the doctrine of the presence and reception of the 
body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper, contained 
in the Augsburg Confession : 

1. From Mr. Shober's Review. 

P. 4. Mr. Shober says: "That the body of Christ fills 
all space, none but idiots can believe." 

P. 28. Mr. S. remarks : " If every body who partook of 
the elements, partook of the flesh and blood of the Saviour, 
all those would remain in Christ and Christ in them." 
Again : "If this mortal body partook of the humanity of 
Jesus, (as D. Henkel asserted,) in the eucharist, the first 
enjoyment would make that body incorruptible, and if it par- 
took of the glorified humanity, it would make the same like 
his glorified body." 

P. 33. Mr. S. observes : " But his (D. HenkeFs) attempts 
to convince the reader, that the humanity of Christ is en- 
joyed, (received in the eucharist,) are so far-fetched that 
common sense cannot comprehend them, and they are 
abhorrent to the understanding. " 

P. 34. Mr. S. says : " Let me only repeat again that if all 
who partook of the Lord's Supper, eat and drink Jesus 
bodily, they cannot see corruption, they cannot die." 

P. 38. Here Mr. S. charges D. Henkel with endeavoring 
"to make the people believe, that the Rev. Mr. Stork was 
heterodox," because he had said "that one hundred bibles 
would not convince him that the humanity of Christ was 
taken into the Godhead, and that therefore Christ obtained 
all divine perfection." But the Rev. Stork informed Mr. 



216 REVS. SHOBER, STORK AND 

Shober, that the conversation referred to was not about the 
humanity of Christ, but specifically " about the omnipres- 
ence of the body of Christ/ " and the expression occurred in 
a friendly conversation, for, (says Mr. Stork,) the idea was 
so absurd that a body could be everywhere present, that the 
expression, though unguarded, was hastily made." 

P. 39. Mr. S. remarks : "Such is your crafty way to make 
people believe, that we, (particularly Mr. Stork,) do not teach 
right, and this only to lead them, if possible, to believe that 
the body of Christ is everywhere in immensity of space at 
the same moment." And then Mr. S. subjoins the remark 
in refutation of Henkel's view, " After his resurrection Jesus 
was not at the grave, at Emmaus, and with his other disci- 
ples at the same moment." From these extracts we think 
our readers will find no difficulty in deciding whether Mr. 
Shober could have desired the unrestricted recognition of the 
Augsburg Confession by the General Synod, or not. 

But we proceed. That Mr. Shober and his Synod, did not 
adhere implicitly to the Augsburg Confession, is further 
evident from the declaration and official action of, 

2. The Tennessee Conference, 

Which confessedly did so adhere, and which was the 
only ecclesiastical body in America at that time which 
received that symbol without reserve. Of these men, Dr. 
Bachman, in his Discourse before cited, (p. 12,) gives 
the following characteristic : " Some years ago several in- 
dividuals residing in North Carolina, who had previous- 
ly been members of our church, on account of some 
dissatisfaction separated themselves from our communion. 
They chose as a leader an individual by the name of (David) 
Henkel, (hence they are called Henkelites,) a weak and illite- 
rate man, whose ground of dissent, as far as can be gathered 
from the crude, visionary and inflammatory publications, 
which have from time appeared, either under his name or 
that of his sect, was, that the Evangelical Church had de- 
parted from the true doctrines of the Reformation, which 
he and his church had attempted to restore." At a meeting 
of this Tennessee Conference, held in Augusta county, Va., 
in 1824, a proposition was made to appoint a committee of 
conference, to meet a similar committee of the North Caro- 
lina Synod, to confer on the doctrinal differences between 



NORTH CAROLINA SYNOD. 217 

the two bodies. They also instructed a committee " to 
place the doctrines of the North Carolina Synod in one col- 
umn, and those of the Tennessee Conference in another, 
extracted from their published writings of both, and then the 
public can judge which of the two teaches according to the 
Augsburg Confession." 

In the same year, (1824,) David Henkel addressed a let- 
ter to the Synod of Maryland and Virginia, in which he 
asserts, " The doctrines on which the said ministers of 
North Carolina have deviated from the doctrines of tbe 
Lutheran church, are these: They teach, 1. That baptized 
or not baptized, faith saves us. 2. That the real humanity 
of Christ is not omnipresent, and that none but idiots can 
believe that his body fills all space. 3. Consequently that 
the real body and blood are not present, administered and 
received in the Lord's Supper." See p. 4 of his printed 
memorial. 

Tbe same is evident from the letter of D. Henkel and 
eighteen of his adherents, addressed to Rev. Messrs. Stork, 
Shober, J. and D. Sherer, 1 charging them with teaching 
doctrines inconsistent with the Augsburg Confession, and 
Luther's Catechism, " and inviting them to a public disputa- 
tion at the time and place of their next synodical meeting.' ' 
p. 2 of said letter. 

The minutes of this Conference for 1827 furnish abun- 
dance of evidence of the same kind. Page 33: "The 
Tennessee Synod impeach them, (the ministers of North 
Carolina Synod,) with having deviated from the Lutheran 
Confession of Faith, and propagating doctrines under the 
covert of Lutheranism, which are erroneous." " One of 
the charges against them is that they have deviated from the 
Lutheran doctrines." p. 35. Again: "The ministers of the 
North Carolina Synod call themselves Lutherans ; but, as 
we believe, that they propagate doctrines contrary to the 
Augustan Confession, we consider it necessary to require of 
them to stand an examination. It is necessary to correct a 
wrong opinion, which is : that Lutheran ministers are at 
liberty to deviate from the Augustan Confession whereinso- 
ever they conceive it to be erroneous. Some ministers, 

(1) It is proper to remark that the Rev. Mr. Sherer had publicly denied 
this charge, and defined his position. 
19 



218 REVS. SHAFFER AND RJECK. 

(namely, of North Carolina Synod, ) have declared that they 
did not care ivhat the Augustan Confession teaches, that they 
simply taught the doctrines of the Scriptures. Further, that 
Luther was only a man and liable to err" 

Finally, that the North Carolina Synod were known to 
teach doctrines on minor points different from the Augsburg 
Confession, is proved by the fact, that when a Mr. Seechrist 
left the North Carolina Synod, and applied for admission im 
the Tennessee Conference, they examined him, and made 
him renounce the supposed errors of the Synod of North 
Carolina and avow his belief in baptismal regeneration and 
the presence and reception of the body and blood of Christ in 
the eucharist. See pages 8 and 9 of their Minutes for 1823. 

3. From the Testimony of Rev. D. F. Sch^effer, D. D. 

In the Lutheran Intelligencer for 1 827, we find an article 
from the pen of the editor, on the state of the church in 
North Carolina. On p. 74 he says: "From these, (several 
recent letters from North Carolina,) we learn, "that those 
who represented themselves as Lutherans, (the Henkelites,) 
but taught doctrines diametrically opposite to those which the 
church approves, are sinking in the estimation of all who know 
by experience and from the sacred scriptures, [our only 
guide in matters of faith,) that to be born again and made 
meet unto salvation, is more than to be baptized." Nay, oth- 
ers " are induced to inquire into those matters, and acknowl- 
edge that the doctrines taught by our regularly authorized 
ministers are scriptural, and that those who have arrogated 
to themselves the authority to teach without submitting to 
an examination or ordination by one or other Synod, (allu- 
ding to David Henkel,) have departed from the true faith/' 

4. From Rev. John Reck. 

In a report of a committee on the state of religion in 
North Carolina, of which this esteemed brother was chair- 
man, he remarks : " The doctrines of the Bible, as published 
by the Great Reformer of Saxony, and echoed by the Augs- 
burg Confession, are substantially taught by us, (that is, by 
the North Carolina Synod.") Having thus proved that the 
North Carolina Synod did not receive the Augsburg Con- 
fession unrestrictedly, from the testimony of their enemies 
who went out from their midst, from the declarations of her 



GENERAL SYNOD. 219 

prominent ministers themselves, we now close the evidence 
in regard to them by showing that they had not only as 
individuals exercised the right of differing from the Augs- 
burg Confession when they believed it to differ from the 
word of God, but that when in 1832, they as a Synod 
collectively and officially adopted as 

5. Their Constitution, 

the Constitution for Synods, recommended by the General 
Synod, they avowed their assent to the Confession in the 
following usual and qualified terms: "We believe that the 
scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and practice, 
and that the fundamental doctrines of the scriptures are 
taught in a manner substantially correct in the doctrinal 
'articles of the Augsburg Confession." See their Minutes for 
1832, German copy, p. 20. 

Our own Position in reference to Henkelism. 

As this has sometimes been misunderstood, and may be 
unknown to our younger brethren generally, it may here not 
be irrelevant to remark that nearly one half of this Tennes- 
see Conference, which for some years consisted chiefly of 
David Henkel, his father, and several of his brothers, 
resided in our pastoral district in Virginia between 1820 and 
1825, and during the whole time carried on the same war- 
fare against us, charging us with upholding the General 
Synod and with not adhering to the doctrines of the Augs- 
burg Confession. Hundreds of our parishioners yet live to 
testify that we never pretended to deny the differences be- 
tween us, and that in whatever defence we felt called on to 
make, we represented their peculiarities either as misappre- 
hensions of the Augsburg Confession, or especially the 
doctrine of the bodily presence as being remnants of Ro- 
manism, retained indeed in the Confession, but universally 
rejected by our church in the present age. 

Having now established beyond all contradiction the 
merely fundamental adhesion of the North Carolina Synod 
to the Augsburg Confession, we may now add a few words 
concerning several other Synods. We begin with the 
ancient 



220 SYNOD OF PENNSYLVANIA 



Synod of Pennsylvania. 

Although it is a well known fact that this respectable 
body has not, for about half a century, required assent to any 
thing more than the Bible, not one of the former symbolical 
books being ever named at licensure or ordination, as may 
be seen even from the new Liturgy : and although her 
merely fundamental accordance in fact with the Augsburg 
Confession is included in the general testimony of Drs. 
Hazelius, Bachman, Lochman, Krauth, Lintner, &c, pre- 
sented in former articles, it will be interesting to hear 
additional evidence. 

1. Rev. Probst, who was a member of that Synod from 
1813 until his recent death, and well acquainted with the 
sentiments of his brethren, in a work published in 1826, 
for the express purpose of promoting a formal and complete 
union of the German Reformed and Lutheran churches in 
America, entitled, "Reunion of the Lutherans and Re- 
formed," argues throughout on the supposition that there 
was no material difference of doctrinal views between them, 
the Lutherans having relinquished the bodily presence and 
the Reformed unconditional election. Speaking of the sup- 
posed obstacles to such union, he remarks: "The doctrine 
of unconditional election cannot be in the way. This doc- 
trine has long since been abandoned ; for there can scarcely 
be a single German Reformed preacher found who regards 
it as his duty to, defend this doctrine. Zwingli's more liberal, 
rational and scriptural view of this doctrine, as well as of 
the Lord's Supper, has become the prevailing one among 
Lutherans and Reformed, and it has been deemed proper to 
abandon the view of both Luther and Calvin on the subject 
of both these doctrines." p. 74. 

Again : " The whole mass of the old Confessions was 
occasioned by the peculiar circumstances of those troublous 
times, has become obsolete by the lapse of ages, and is yet 
valuable only as matter of history. Those times and cir- 
cumstances have passed away, and our situation both in 
regard to political and ecclesiastical relations, is entirely 
changed. We are therefore not bound to these books, but 
only to the Bible. For what do the unlearned know of the 
Augsburg Confession, or the Form of Concord, of the Synod 
of Dort," &c. p. 76. 



TESTIMONY OF DE. LOCH MAIN. 221 

Again: "Both churches (the Lutheran and Reformed) 
advocate the evangelical liberty of judging for themselves, 
and have one and the same ground of their faith, the Bible. 
Accordingly, both regard the Gospel as their exclusive rule 
of faith and practice, and are forever opposed to all violations 
of the liberty of conscience." p. 76. 

Finally: "All enlightened and intelligent preachers of 
both churches agree, that there is much in the former sym- 
bolical books (or confessions of faith) that must be stricken 
out as antiquated and contrary to common sense, and be 
made conformable with the Bible, and that we have no right 
to pledge ourselves to the mere human opinions of Luther, 
or Calvin, or Zwingii, and that we have but one master, 
Christ. Nor is any evangelical Christian bound to the 
interpretations which Luther or Calvin, or any other person 
may place on the words of Christ ; but each one has the 
right to interpret them according to the dictates of his own 
conscience." p. 80. "Inasmuch as all educated ministers 
of the Lutheran and Reformed churches now entertain more 
reasonable and more scriptural views on those doctrines 
which were formerly the subjects of controversy, what 
necessity is there of a continued separation?" p. 81. 

2. Testimony of Dr. Lochman, confessedly one of the 
most active, distinguished and pious divines of our church, 
in the preface to his Catechism, published in 1822, after 
stating that the proper name of our church is Evangelical, 
and not Lutheran, thus defines 

The leading Principles op our Church. 

1) "That the Holy Scriptures and not human authority, 
are the only source whence we are to draw our religious 
sentiments, whether they relate to faith or practice." 

2) "That Christians are accountable to God alone for 
their religious principles," and therefore no man should be 
punished by civil governments for his opinion's sake, &c. 

3) As Christ has left no express directions for church 
government, &c, therefore every society may follow its own. 
judgment, and the Lutheran Church in different countries 
has adopted different forms of government, &c. But not a 
word is said about adherence to the Augsburq Confession as 
belonging to the principles of our Church. Moreover, that. 

19a. 



222 PROPOSED UNION OF LUTHERANS 

the Dr. himself, in common with the majority of his asso- 
ciates, did not believe the doctrine of the 

Presence and reception of the body and blood of 
Christ in the Eucharist, 

is evident from his Catechism on that subject, p. 33, where 
the question, "For what purpose did Christ institute this 
sacrament?" is answered thus: 

"Not only to put us in mind of his great love for sinners, 
but also to offer us an interest in his sacrifice, and to assure 
us that all penitent and believing souls should be partakers 
of it, as surely as they partook the consecrated bread and 
wine. Bread and wine are the pledges to assure us of our 
interest in the sacrifice of Christ." But not a word is said 
about the Saviour's body and blood being present or received 
by all or any communicant ; and the spiritual benefit affirmed 
is confined to penitent and believing souls. And in his work, 
entitled, History, Doctrine and Discipline of the Lutheran 
Church, published in 1818, p. 106, he explains the terms 
"receiving the body and blood of Christ," as follows : "As 
sure as the penitent communicant receives the bread and 
wine, so surely does he receive the body and blood of the 
Lord Jesus — or in other words, the benefits of redemp- 
tion." 

That the Rev. Dr. Undress, also one of our most distin- 
guished divines, entertained the same views on this subject 
was well known during his lifetime, and is evident from a 
note to his articles in the Lutheran Intelligencer for 1 827, 
p. 255. Unfortunately, although he wrote much and well, 
he published very little. Yet on the subject under consid- 
eration, the extract from his letter given above am&ng the 
testimonies on the general state of our American church, 
affords sufficient proof; for, in describing our church in 
general, he of course describes one of its prominent portions, 
the synod to which he belonged. 

A united Lutheran and Reformed Theological Seminary. 

3. In accordance with these views the synod of Pennsyl- 
vania, in 1819, "appointed the Rev* Drs. Schmucker, 
Lochman, Muhlenberg and Ernst, as a committee to confer 
with a similar committee of the German Reformed Synod, 
and devise a plan for a united Theological Seminary for the 



AJD REFORMED. 223 

two denominations." If the Pennsylvania Synod had 
differed materially from the views of the German Reformed 
would they have desired to unite with them in erecting a 
joint Seminary ? 

An entire union of both Churches proposed. 

4. In 1822, at the meeting in Germantown, the Pennsyl- 
vania Synod unanimously adopted the following resolution, 
on motion of Drs. Endress and Muhlenberg : 

"Resolved, That a committee be appointed by this Synod 
to deliberate in the fear of God on the propriety of a prop- 
osition for a general union of our Church in this country 
with the Evangelical Reformed Church, and also on the 
possibility and most suitable method of carrying this reso- 
lution into effect." p. 16 of their Minutes for 1822. 

Unanimous Declaration of Pennsylvania Synod. 

5. When the Synod of Pennsylvania, at the meeting of 
1823, at Lebanon, felt it a duty to yield to the popular 
clamor excited for selfish purposes by some political dema- 
gogues and a renegade German layman, who, it is believed, 
fled from justice in his native country, and here published a 
slanderous book against the synod, and hawked it about, 
from house to house, that body, by an almost unanimous 
vote, adopted the following declaration of sentiments in the 
preamble to their resolutions : "We beheld large and beau- 
tiful congregations of brethren (the Reformed) who labor 
with us in the same spirit and with the same view in pro- 
claiming the doctrines of Jesus, and discharging the duties 
of the office of reconciliation, who often in the same house 
labor, teach and worship the same Lord in the same manner 
and for the same purpose. We gave utterance, as it were, 
from afar to the wish, dictated by love, to enter into a closer 
union with these oar German Evangelical Protestant breth- 
ren, and termed it a union of the German Protestant Church. 
But our own brethren (members) have misapprehended us," 
&c. p. 15 of their minutes for 1823. If then the members 
of this respectable body know their own doctrinal views, 
these words contain a declaration that they agreed substan- 
tially with those of the Reformed, who never received the 
peculiarities of the Augsburg Confession, such as the pres- 
ence of the body and blood of the Saviour in the Eucharist, 



224 SYNOD OF NEW YORK. 

&c, and thus they confirm the declaration of Rev. Probst, 
that the members of the Pennsylvania Synod generally had 
rejected this doctrine. 

Synod and Ministerium of New York. 

Of this respectable body, which formerly embraced all 
the Lutheran ministers in that state, we will merely present 
the explicit and conclusive testimony of one of its oldest, 
most learned and respectable ministers, contained in a pri- 
vate communication to us: ''In the earlier days of our 
Ministerium, it did require an assent to the Augsburg Con- 
fession ; but how far qualified, or "whether qualified at all, 
I cannot say. Nor do I know whether the requirement 
was uniformly insisted on. That it was not contained in 
the first constitution of that Synod / am confident, and 
equally so that a majority of its members were disinclined 
to any such rule. In the Constitution afterwards unani- 
mously adopted, every thing of this sort was not only omit- 
ted, but forbidden; and no attempt to unsettle the long 
practice of our Ministerium in this respect has been made, 
or could be made with any hope of success." The Synod 
of New York has, therefore, certainly long since rejected 
the binding authority of the former symbolical books. 

The Synods of West Pennsylvania, Maryland, and 
Virginia. 

In regard to these several bodies, it is a well known and 
undisputed fact, that neither of them ever required any 
pledge at all, except to the word of God, not even to the 
Augsburg Confession, until the General Synod proposed 
the acknowledgment of that Confession as to fundamentals. 
The liberal, yet truly scriptural spirit which pervaded both 
of them, is echoed by the President of the latter body in 
his address to a number of candidates for ordination in 
1828: "Wherever we cast our eyes, we see the Christian 
community actively engaged. The Bible, the Bible appears 
to be the watchword, and the dissemination of its heaven- 
born truths the motto of the Protestant world." Urging 
them particularly to take heed to their doctrines, he utters the 
following language: "Let the Gospel of Christ, therefore, 
be the fountain whence you derive all your religious views, 
and according to that standard test and decide upon every 



SYNOD OF WEST PENNSYLVANIA. 225 

doctrine of religion that is presented to you for acceptance. 
Then we are sure that ''Christ and him crucified," will be the 
burden of your ministerial performances, and the theme of 
all your discourses, and that, like the Apostle, you will be 
"determined to glory only in the cross of our Lord Jesus 
Christ." But not a word is said about any human creed. 
Lutheran Intelligencer, vol. III. p. 228. Even the children 
of the church are taught to regard the mode of the Saviour's 
presence in the Eucharist as a subject which should be left 
to the free judgment of each individual, as may be seen 
from the Catechism of Dr. Morris, published in 1844, and 
extensively used in these Synods, as well as in the church 
generally, in which work, also, this presence is pronounced 
to be a spiritual one. pp. 100, 101. 

The Rev. Dr. Baugher, in his excellent report on the 
Doctrines and Usages of the Synod of Maryland, prepared 
by order of said body about the year 1840, fully confirms 
our account of the dbctrinal position of this respectable 
body 

"On Regeneration. — We believe that the Scriptures 
teach that regeneration is the act of God, the Holy Ghost, 
by which, through the truth, the sinner is persuaded to 
abandon his sins and submit to God, on the terms made 
known in the gospel. This change, we are taught, is radi- 
cal, and is essential to present peace and eternal happiness. 
Consequently, it is possible, and is the privilege of the re- 
generated person to know and rejoice in the change pro- 
duced in him." 

"Of the Sacraments. — We believe that the Scriptures 
teach, that there are but two sacraments, viz. : Baptism and 
the Lord's Supper, in each of which, truths essential to sal- 
vation are symbolically represented. We do not believe 
that they exert any influence * ex opere operato,' but only 
through the faith of the believer. Neither do the scriptures 
warrant the belief, that Christ is present in the Lord's Sup- 
per in any other than a spiritual manner." 

" Of the Symbolical Books. — Luther's Larger and 
Smaller Catechisms, the Formula Concordise, Augsburg 
Confession, Apology, and Smalkald Articles are called in 
Germany the Symbolical Books of the church. We regard 
them as good and useful exhibitions of truth, but do not 



226 SYNOD OF MARYLAND. 

receive them as binding on the conscience, except so far as 
they agree with the word of God." 

It will be seen, that the position of that body on the sub- 
ject of baptismal regeneration, the real or bodily presence, 
and the obligation of the former symbolical books, is clearly 
expressed. 

We have thus proved, from the express published decla- 
rations of some half dozen of our most respectable divines, 
that the doctrinal position of our American church in gen- 
eral, about the time of the origin of the General Synod and 
thereafter, was that of fundamental agreement with the 
Augsburg Confession, with acknowledged difference in mi- 
nor points. We have proved the same fact concerning the 
Synod of North Carolina, of Pennsylvania, of West Pennsyl- 
vania, of Maryland and Virginia, and of New York in par- 
ticular ; and as there is not a single author who, within this 
period, has published any thing either affirming or proving 
the contrary, we should suppose this point must be regarded 
as settled in all time to come. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

The General Synod herself. 

We shall now proceed to show that the same doctrinal po- 
sition was also assumed and perpetuated to this time, by the 
General Synod herself. That these were the doctrinal views 
which she was understood to profess and hold, we prove, 

a) By the testimony of her most violent opponents, the 
members of the Tennessee Conference, who made it a stand- 
ing objection to the General Synod, that she was not Lu- 
theran, and had not adopted and "did not adhere to the Augs- 
burg Confession." In the Minutes of said Conference for 
1822, p. 8, (of German copy) we find the substance given 
of a letter from a minister of their own body, in which he 
affirms "that the General Synod is not Lutheran, but much 
rather the contrary." In their Minutes of 1823, p. 6, they 



THE GENERAL SYNOD. 227 

publish a communication from one of their churches in Vir- 
ginia, stating that they will accept no minister connected 
with the General Synod, but desire to have one belonging 
to their Conference, ''because they do yet adhere to the 
Augsburg Confession." On p. 7 we find a similar letter 
from a church formerly belonging to the pastoral district of 
which I had charge in Virginia, stating, "that as they had 
no opportunity to obtain the services of any minister, except 
such as belong to the General Synod, they beg to be sup- 
plied by said Conference, as it yet adheres to the Augsburg 
Confession." 

At a meeting of a Conference held in Nelson county, Ky., 
and consisting chiefly of several members of the Tennessee 
Conference, on p. 5, of their Minutes, we read: "Every 
.article thereof (of the General Synod's Constitution) was 
minutely examined; whereupon the session (Conference) 
unanimously declared the Constitution of the General Synod 
to be contrary to the Holy Scriptures and the Augsburg 
Confession of faith, and subversive to (of) Christian lib- 
erty." Again, on p. 6: "It was unanimously resolved, 
that we by no means sanction the General Synod, as we 
have sufficient reason to believe that the General Synod 
have departed from the Lutheran doctrine" 

2. We shall prove that the General Synod did not adhere 
to all the tenets of the Augsburg Confession, from her oum 
acts and declarations. 

a) The xlugsburg Confession is never once so much as 
named in the Constitution of the General Synod, and yet if 
the members framing that Constitution had designed to re- 
quire an implicit conformity to it, would they not at least 
have mentioned that Confession in some way ? 

b) Luther's Catechism not approved as symbolic or 

PERFECT. 

In 1821, the very first General Synod ever convened 
passed the following resolution : 

"Resolved, That the present state of our church requiring 
it, a committee be appointed to compose an English cate- 
chism, and to offer it for the consideration of the next 
General Synod." 

The Rev. Drs. En dress, J. G. Schmucker, Lochman, and 
Messrs. Shober and D. F. Schseffer were appointed, all of 



228 THEOL. SEM. OF GEN. SYNOD. 

whom, (confessedly among our very first divines,) regarded 
it as necessary to make various improvements in Luther's 
Catechism to adapt it to what was " required by the present 
state of our church" or to compose a new one. One of their 
number, Dr. Lochman, had actually made preparations for 
such a work, which he published on his own responsibility 
the succeeding year, 1822, before the meeting of the next 
General Synod. In 1823 this committee submitted their 
report, together with the materials for a new catechism. As 
these materials were not ready for the press, and the General 
Synod wished to act deliberately in this matter, the materials 
were committed to another committee, consisting of Rev. 
Messrs. Shober, D. F. Shaeffer, Herbst, and ourself, "to 
examine and report thereon with additions." This commit- 
tee, principally through our own efforts, resolved to retain 
Luther's Catechism for the present, and to report an improved 
translation of the questions, What is your state by nature ? 
&c, with explanatory additions on the decalogue, infant 
baptism and the eucharist, which were furnished by ourself, 
were adopted by the next General Synod and published by 
their order. See Minutes for 1821, p. 5; for 1823, p. 5; 
and for 1 825, p. 9. Now if the General Synod had regarded 
Luther's Catechism as symbolical, or had desired to require 
every minister to use it in the instruction of the young, 
would they have appointed a committee to supercede it by 
another? 

e) But the General Synod did explicitly declare her rela- 
tion to the Augsburg Confession at a very early day. At 
the meeting of the third General Synod in 1825, that body 
feeling the necessity and duty of providing their numerous 
destitute churches with competent ministers of the Gospel, 
took action on the subject of establishing a 

Theological Seminary. 

And here certainly, if anywhere, when fixing the princi- 
ples on which the institution was to be conducted, and deter- 
mining the doctrines which should be taught to those who 
were to minister in holy things in time to come, the members 
of the General Synod would certainly feel it their duty to 
fix the doctrinal standard which they desired to have incul- 
cated on their future associates and their successors in office. 
And did they neglect this solemn duty ? No, verily, the 



THE '•LUTHERASER" REBUTTED. 229 

very first resolution they adopted was devoted to this sacred 
obligation, and is couched in the following words : 

" Whereas, the General Synod regard it as a solemn duty 
imposed on them by their Constitution, and due from them 
*,o their God and to the Church, to provide for the proper 
education cf men of piety and talents for the Gospel 
ministry ; therefore, 

"Resolved, 1. That the General Synod will forthwith 
commence, in the name of the Triune God, and in humble 
reliance on his aid, the establishment of a Theological Sem- 
inary, which shall be exclusively devoted to the glory of 
our Divine Redeemer, Jesus Christ, who is God over all 
blessed forever. And that in this Seminary shall be taught, 
in the German and English languages, the fundamental 
doctrines of the sacred scriptures as contained in the Augsburg 
'Confession." 

Here, then, the question is settled forever as to what was 
to be the doctrinal basis of the Seminary. The Augsburg 
Confession was to be used as well to exclude Socinians, and 
other fundamental errorists, as out of respect to that ancient 
symbol of our church. Yet that Confession was not to be 
implicitly followed, its binding authority was explicitly limited 
to fundamental doctrines ; not to the fundamental doctrines or 
features of ancient Lutheranfsm, amongst which the so-called 
old Lutherans of the present day would class some of Lu- 
ther's peculiarities, such as the doctrine of the bodily pres- 
ence, &c, but its binding authority extends only to the 
fundamental doctrines of Scriptures, among which no theo- 
logian of any standing will rank the peculiar doctrines of 
his sect. For every enlightened divine will cordially respond 
to the noble sentiment of the venerable Dr. Miller, of 
Princeton, but recently translated to abetter world : "Though 
I am a decided C.Jvinist, (says the Dr..) yet it would never 
occur to me to place the peculiarities of the Calvinistic creed 
among the fundamentals of our common Christianity." 
Thus felt and thus acted the members of our General Synod, 
and we rejoice that we were among them. 

Personal charge of the " Lutheraner," of Missouri, 
rebutted. 

Here it may not be improper to add a few words touching 
the course of "Der Lutheraner/' a paper representing the 



230 THE "LUTHERANER" REBUTTED. 

Old Lutherans of the West, whose editor not only denounces 
all the late efforts of European nations to cast off that oppres- 
sion from which he and so many thousands have found a 
happy asylum in the Western world, as unjustifiable rebel- 
lion, but openly advocates the duty of passive obedience to 
kings amid the most flagrant oppression. That paper is but 
consistent with itself when advocating similar absolute sub- 
mission to creeds — for the foundations of civil and religious 
liberty are the same. This paper recently published an 
article flatly charging us with perjury and dishonesty, because 
we professedly reject some minor tenets of the Augsburg 
Confession, to which the article affirms, our oath as Professor 
in the Theological Seminary bound us. Now this oath of 
office is similar to the resolution of the General Synod 
above quoted, expressly limiting our obligation to the Augs- 
burg Confession "to the fundamental doctrines of Scripture." 
We wrote it ourself, and ought to understand its import. 
These men are ignorant of the doctrinal history of our 
American church, and if they are christians ought not so 
precipitately to pass judgment on what they but imperfectly 
understand. They should know that our American church, 
exercising her inherent right to judge and act for herself, 
had, a quarter of a century before the origin of the General 
Synod, rejected the binding authority of the Augsburg Con- 
fession, and of all other human creeds; and had in fact 
rejected some of the minor tenets of the Augsburg Confes- 
sion : that the founders of the General Synod approving the 
state of doctrine existing among themselves, did not once 
name the Augsburg Confession in their Constitution, and 
whenever in subsequent years that Confession was referred 
to in any of their acts, it was invariably accompanied with a 
restriction to the fundamental doctrines of scripture. On 
exactly the same basis the Theological Seminary founded by 
them was placed ; and that we have been true to this basis 
and have occupied exactly the same ground in our theolog- 
ical instructions and our publications is admitted. Our 
Popular Theology, containing our doctrinal system, was 
universally received as a fair exhibition of the prevailing 
doctrines of the great mass of . our American churches. 
From various commendatory articles we cite only what 
refers to this point. In the Lutheran Observer for July 1, 
1833 ? then edited by him, the Rev. Dr. Morris, whose 



THE POPULAR THEOLOGY. 231 

extensive acquaintance with the church cannot be doubted, 
says : " This work is characterized by all that logical preci- 
sion and clearness of thought, which distinguish the writings 
of that gentleman, and it will really be a valuable addition 
to the literature of our church. We take pleasure in recom- 
mending it to all who desire to see the fundamental doctrines 
of the church plainly stated and triumphantly proved," &c. 
And in his introduction to Dr. Kurtz's work, entitled, " Why 
are you a Lutheran ?" he remarks : V Dr. Schmucker's val- 
uable Popular Theology has contributed much to remove 
wrong impressions from the minds of many intelligent read- 
ers." In the Observer for January 9, 1835, a highly re- 
spectable writer affirms : "We think that in presenting 
this work to the public, Dr. S. has conferred a distinguished 
favor upon the members of our Church, &c. The public 
has already judged his book. The highest encomium, we 
apprehend, which it can receive has been bestowed in the 
eagerness with which it was received," &c. February 
6, the able editor of the Observer, Dr. Kurtz, says : "Re- 
garding as we do the Popular Theology not only as an 
ably written work, exhibiting much learning and a vast 
amount of lucid and conclusive argument on subjects of 
paramount interest and vital importance, but also as a 
correct representation of the doctrinal and ecclesiastical views 
entertained by our ministers and people generally , we are hap- 
py," &c. And Dr. Lmtner and the committee of Hartwick 
Synod, affirm in their notes on the Augsburg Confession, in 
1837: "Dr. S.'s Popular Theology is a standard work in 
our church." It is evident then that we agree with the pre- 
vailing doctrinal views of the churches of the General 
Synod, which are those of fundamental agreement with the 
Augsburg Confession, with acknowledged differences on 
minor points, and as this is what is required by the Profes- 
sor's oath in the Seminary, Ave are at a loss to see any ground 
for the charge against us in the " Lutheraner." The Pop- 
ular Theology has of late sometimes been censured as not 
giving a correct view of the doctrines of the Lutheran sym- 
bols. Such censure is, however, both unmanly and unchris- 
tian, not to say unscientific. We nowhere profess to present 
the symbolic theology of the church in Europe. On the 
contrary, our preface and the introductory chapter on the 
history of the Augsburg Confession, and the qualified man- 



232 THE POPULAR THEOLOGY. 

ner in "which it is received in this country, distinctly state 
the standpoint which we occupy ; and to censure a work for 
not containing what it does not profess to present, is unworthy 
of a respectable critic, or an honorable man. 

d) Pastoral Addresses of the General Synod. 

Even the second General Synod ever convened, (in 1823,) 
in their Pastoral Address to the churches, distinguished be- 
tween fundamental and non-fundamental aberrations or de- 
viations from the scriptures or from the Augsburg Confession, 
affirming that the former we should view with charity, but 
fundamental errorists or " heretics" we should cast out." 
p. 14. But in the address of the General Synod of 1829, 
that body has given as explicit a declaration as language 
can convey, which must forever remove all doubt as to the 
doctrinal position she occupies : 

"Amid these circumstances we rejoice anew in the grand 
design of the General Synod of our church. This design 
is not to produce an absolute uniformity in minor points of 
doctrine, for we have no reason to believe that this existed 
even in the primitive church ; and we are decidedly of opin- 
ion, that whilst the grand doctrines of the Preformation are 
absolutely insisted on, every minister and layman should 
have full liberty to approach the study of his Bible untram- 
nieled by the shackles of human creeds. The General 
Synod therefore only requires of those who are attached to her 
connexion, that they hold the fundamental doctrines of the 
Gospel, as taught in the Augsburg Confession, and in all 
minor points leaves them unrestricted. On the one hand 
we are not able to go with those who renounce uncondition- 
ally all creeds and confessions, because, we cannot see how 
Socinians could be effectually excluded from the church 
without them. But we feel well assured that the great ma- 
jority of creeds in the Christian church, by entering far too 
much into minor ramifications of doctrine, and attaching too 
great importance to subordinate and even doubtful points, 
have cherished in the most direct manner, and from their 
very nature must cherish the unhallowed spirit of bigotry 
and sectarianism. It cannot, we think, be doubted by any 
one who has paid attention to this subject, that there are in 
each of the several orthodox denominations, and often in the 
individual congregation, persons differing from each other as 



PLEDGE AT LICENSURE. 233 

much as the several (denominational) creeds do. Why 
then should not all the Synods which bear the name of the 
immortal Luther, and still retain the cardinal views of that 
illustrious Reformer, be associated together by the very slen- 
der bond of our General Synod, though they may not agree in 
some points not touching the fundamental doctrines of the 
Augsburg Confession?" Minutes for 1829, pp. 15, 16. 

An invitation by the General Synod to all Lutheran Synods 
holding the fundamental doctrines of the Bible as taught by 
our church, to unite with them, was adopted in 1835, (see 
Min., pp. 23, 24,) as part of their Constitution. 

Explicit recommendation op the General Synod to bind 
only to the fundamentals. 
In the Constitution for Synods prepared by the General 
Synod and recommended to all District Synods, in 1829, it 
is directed that candidates for licensure and ordination be 
pledged absolutely to the Bible, but only to the fundamentals 
as taught in the Augsburg Confession. It is in these words : 

1. "Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testaments to be the word of God, and the only infallible 
rule of faith and practice ? 

2. Do you believe the fundamental doctrines of the word 
of God are taught in a manner substantially correct in the 
doctrinal articles of the Augsburg Confession ??' See Min- 
utes for 1829, p. 38-9. 

In addition to this accumulated mass of evidence, and to 
show its perfectly conclusive character, we confidently affirm, 
that for a quarter of a century after the foundation of the 
General Synod, no writer connected with that Synod has 
published a single page inconsistent with the above testimony. 
and no writer out of the General Synod has represented the 
prevailing opinions of the churches and ministers of the 
General Synod, to be different from what the above testimo- 
nies affirm. 



CHAPTER IX. 

Features of the American Lutheran Church. 

We claim that the American Lutheran Church is a free, 
integral, independent part of the church of Christ, possessing. 
20a 



234 FEATURES OF THE 

all the privileges and acting under all the obligations per- 
taining to any other branch of Christ's kingdom, and there- 
fore possessing the full right to settle its own standards of 
doctrine, discipline, and worship. On the proof of this 
almost self-evident principle, we deem it unnecessary at 
present to enter. And why should there not be an Ameri- 
can Lutheran church, as well as any other ? There is a 
German, a Danish, a Swedish Lutheran church, each pos- 
sessing its distinctive peculiarities, arising from their differ- 
ent civil governments, and the different views of those who 
founded them, to say nothing of the differences between our 
church in the several kingdoms and principalities of Germany. 
Then why should not American Lutherans be permitted to 
organize their church, in accordance with the principles of 
their own glorious civil institutions, in conformity to the dic- 
tates of their own consciences and their views of the inspired 
word of God ? Are they less able to search the Scriptures 
with fidelity and success, than their brethren of other coun- 
tries? Are we less competent to judge of what suits our 
peculiar circumstances, and the peculiar age of the world, 
and the signs of the eventful times in which we live than 
others ? Are we less able than others, to apply the great 
principle of Lutheranism, that the Scriptures are the only 
infallible guide and rule of faith and practice, that noble 
principle without which the immortal Reformer could never 
have accomplished the great work of Reformation, and to 
which he with Melancthon and the greater part of their 
coadjutors remained faithful to the end of his life ; but which 
many of his less noble and less enlightened followers grad- 
ually abandoned ? It is a well known fact, that by continu- 
ing to search the Scriptures, Luther continued to improve 
his views till near the end of his life. ISTor were the opin- 
ions rejected by him merely the corruptions of Romanism. 
During a large part of his life he was a rigid Augustinian, 
or as we would now term it, a rigid Calvinist,- on the distin- 
guishing features of that system ; although Melancthon had 
commenced to change his opinions on that subject, as early 
as the publication of the second edition of his Loci. Having 
thus felt compelled, by the light of God's word, to continue 
changing and improving his views, Luther was so far from 
wishing his attainments to be regarded as the ne plus ultra 
of doctrinal purity, that he dissuades men from reading his 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 235 

works, and urges them to drink from the infallible fountain 
itself. We have, therefore, no right to renounce the privi- 
leges, or to neglect the duty of adhering to his principle, 
and of rejecting those of his opinions which we find contrary 
to Scripture as well as also of conforming our government, 
discipline and worship to the precepts and spirit of the New 
Testament, and the peculiar circumstances of our age and 
country. 

And are. not the peculiar circumstances of our situation, 
social, geographical and political, at least as characteristic, 
striking and potential, as those which gave diversity to the 
church in the different countries of Europe ? A moment's 
glance at the contrast must convince every unbiased mind. 

In Europe, the unhappy union of church and state, com- 
menced by Constantine in the fourth century, and continued 
in Europe till the present day, has hampered the energies 
and corrupted the purity of the church : this country, on 
the other hand, is the chosen theatre of God for the free, 
unbiased development of humanity, and the settlement of 
the highest questions regarding its privileges, capacities and 
duties, in social, political and religious life. There the civil 
government restrains the activity of private christians within 
legalized limits, giving a crippled form and an enfeebled aspect 
to the body of Christ : here the laity are left to exert their 
full influence, and to sustain their important part in all the 
enterprises for the advancement of the Redeemer's kingdom. 
There, ministers are not allowed to preach oftener than their 
instructions from their government prescribe, namely, once 
a Sabbath. Preaching at night or in the week, is wholly 
unusual, protracted meetings for cominued preaching, &c, 
are utterly unknown, and ministers of similar views and. 
congenial feelino-s never, so far as we could learn, exchano-e 
pulpits, though they may spend a lifetime within a few miles 
of each other! Here the servant of Christ can preach as 
often as his strength- admits, and the exigencies of his 
charge seem to require ; when requisite he can invite the 
aid of a neighboring brother, and can reciprocate the favor 
by occupying his pulpit in return. There, revivals of reli- 
gion and special efforts to obtain them of God, are almost 
wholly unknown ; here these gracious showers of divine 
influence are constantly refreshing one or other part of the 
vineyard of the Lord, There, sy nodical meetings of min- 



236 FEATURES OF THE 

isters and lay elders as representatives of the churches, to 
deliberate on the interests of the church, and enact rules for 
her government, are unknown. In one or two portions of 
the church we hear of occasional synods ; but they do not 
consist of the ministry in general, but only of select digni- 
taries of the church ; nor of any laymen elected by the 
churches, but only of a few political officers of the govern- 
ment ! Here, the ministers and lay representatives of a 
given district, all meet on terms of equality to deliberate 
and devise measures for the advancement of the kingdom 
of Christ, subject to no other rules than such as they them- 
selves adopt. There, even in Wittenberg itself, in the ven- 
erable halls once electrified by the fearless eloquence of 
Luther, theological students are not now permitted to inves- 
tigate and discuss untrammeled the various questions of 
human duty and interest in the light of Scripture, history 
and reason ; but an officer of government, forsooth, must 
be present at their debates, noting down the tenor of their 
discussions, especially if they bear on civil governments, or 
the duties or conduct of civil rulers ! And woe to the pros- 
pects of preferment of that student, who should be found 
guilty of a tendency to liberal institutions. Here, theologi- 
cal students are permitted freely to discuss any question 
within the entire range of human interests and duties in the 
light of Scripture, reason and history, none daring to molest 
them or make them afraid. And for the selection of their 
ministers, our congregations need not apply to ungodly poli- 
ticians ; they themselves possess the power, and exercise it 
according to their own judgment. 

In presenting these statements, we wish it distinctly un- 
derstood, that we do not charge any one with approving 
these European peculiarities, which we condemn. Nay, we 
doubt not that the majority of our European brethren (con- 
stituting, if we include those Synods not connected with the 
General Synod, about the half of our ministry) will cor- 
dially unite in this condemnation. Those belonging to the 
General Synod and. to the mother Synod of Pennsylvania, 
will all do so, and we trust also the major part of the others. 
But we present these views to prove, that if ever the pecu- 
liarities of any Christians called for an original, indepen- 
dent re-organization, our fathers were justly summoned to 
this work, which they also nobly accomplished. Cast by 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 237 

the hand of Providence into these Western wilds, separated 
by the vast Atlantic from the mother countiy, they felt this 
to be a peculiar and favorable time to revert to the first 
principles of the apostles, and taking lessons from the civil 
bondage of the church for more than a thousand years, to 
return to the simplicity of the gospel, and adapt their or- 
ganization to the peculiar situation of their adopted coun- 
try. This organization was at first practically begun, and 
gradually fixed by her liturgies and Synodical constitutions, 
and finally completed by the establishment and action of 
the General Synod. 

What are the characteristics of the American Lutheran 
Church? 

I. Feature is the practical rejection of the binding authority 
of all the former symbolical books, except the Augsburg Con-* 
fession. 

As practical rejection signifies rejection in practice ; and 
as those who do not in practice acknowledge the binding 
authority of a book, do necessarily practically reject such 
authority ; it follows that as our fathers during the first 
quarter of this century acknowledged the binding character 
of no human symbol at all, and we since then have acknowl- 
edged none except the Augsburg Confession, they practi- 
cally did reject all those books, and we reject all except the 
Confession of Augsburg. 

II. Feature is the rejection of several tenets formerly held 
by our Church in Europe, and taught in some of her former 
symbolical books. 

a) Exorcism, which is taught in the Taufbuchlein (Tract 
on Baptism) of Luther, and was formerly annexed to his 
Smaller Catechism. 

Let the reader, who is in doubt, examine Luther^ Smaller 
Catechism, in the edition of the symbolical books, published 
by Mr. Ludwig, of New York, a year or two ago, and now 
patronized by the old Lutherans of the West, he will find 
this Taufbuchlein in full, containing the identical directions 
for Exorcism, which we presented in the first chapter of 
this essay. If he will examine that very extensively circu- 
lated edition of the Symbolical Books, edited by the learned 
Dr. Baumgarten, of Halle, published in 1747, he will find 
the very same directions on p. 467 ; and also in the 
Leipsic edition of 1790, p. 610. If he will examine the 



238 FEATURES OF THE 

very first edition of the Concordienbuch, or Authentic Col- 
lection of the Symbolic Books ever published, printed at 
Dresden, in 1580, he will find it there, on p. 170-173. 
And that Luther is its author, is not denied by any one who 
has examined the subject. He first translated it from a 
previously existing Romish Latin directory in 1523, (Funk's 
Kirchenordnungen, p. 124.) In this form it is found in the 
Jen. ed. of his work, vol. II., p. 248-252. In 1524 or 
1 526, he re-wrote it in the form in which it was added to 
the Catechism edited by himself in 1529, (Muller Symbolic 
books, p. 88, 89 of Introduction,) and is found in the Al- 
tenb. ed. of his works, Fom. II., fol. 327. See Kollner, vol. 
I., p. 501, 502, and Baumgarten's Introduction to the Sym- 
bolic books, p. 166. 

If then a book derives its symbolic authority, in any de- 
gree, from the fact that Luther wrote it, this was symboli- 
cal ; or if, as may more properly be contended, it derives 
this character by being received into the authentic edition 
of the Concordienbuch, or official Collection of Symbolical 
books, then also must this character be conceded to it. But 
directions for exorcism were also inserted into some of the 
Kirchenordnungen or directories for worship in the differ- 
ent provinces., of Germany. Luther and Melancthon always 
retained exorcism, as did a large portion of the Lutheran 
Church in Germany, and the entire Church in Sweden. Yea, 
during the 17th century, a rigid adherence to this supersti- 
tious rite was regarded in many portions of the Church, as 
a special mark of fidelity to Lutheranism ; whilst its rejec- 
tion was denounced as a symptom of Crypto- Calvinism. 
But it was more generally regarded as a symbolic inculca- 
tion of natural depravity of the subjects of baptism. Yet 
it is true, and we rejoice that it is so, that a large part of 
the Lutheran Church was at an early day ashamed of this 
remnant of papal superstition, and rejected it. Especially 
in the Latin copies destined for the learned, it was most 
generally omitted. It was excluded from the second edition 
of the Concordienbuch, also printed in 1580, out of regard 
to the Churches of the Electoral Palitinate, which had re- 
jected the practice; and a recent writer, Muller, has as- 
serted that it was not received among the Symbolical Books 
at the beginning, which is evidently a mistake. It was re- 
ceived into the very first edition, but omitted from the sec- 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 239 

ond, as above stated, on the authority of Baumgarten and 
Kollner. And even previously to that, it had been received 
into the Corpus doctrinse Thuring, or Collection of Confes- 
sions, <fec, and into that of Brandenburg and others. In 
Saxony exorcism was relinquished in 1591, but again re- 
stored a few years after, and retained until the last century, 
when it was made optional with the parents, and in some 
cases was actually practised as late as 1836. In Hamburg 
the practice was retained till 1786, and in Sweden until 
1811 ! ! Siegel's Handbuch, vol. II. p. 67. This may suf- 
fice to show, that this book which inculcates exorcism, was 
not only written and sanctioned by Luther himself, but ac- 
tually received into several collections of Creeds and Con- 
fessions, before the Concordienbuch existed, and when that 
was formed, was also received into it ; although the good 
sense of a large portion of the Church at all times raised a 
strong party opposed to it, and led to the publication of dif- 
ferent editions of the Symbolical Books, from which it was 
excluded. Still, it did originally belong to the Symbolical 
Books, as it is still found in some of the latest editions, and 
we are, therefore, perfectly right in quoting exorcism as 
one of the former and now obsolete doctrines of the Lu- 
theran Church. 

b) The next error rejected by us is Private confession and 
absolution. The necessity of enumerating all our particular 
sins to the priest at Confession, termed Auricular Confession, 
Luther and his adherents rejected, but Private Confession, 
at which the individual confessed his sinfulness and pen- 
itence in general, together with absolution, was retained in 
the Lutheran church. "In regard to confession, (says the 
Augsburg Confession, Art. XI,) they (the churches) teach, 
that private absolution ought to be retained in the churches ; 
but that an enumeration of all our transgressions is not 
requisite in confession. See the elucidations on the subject 
in Popular Theology, p 308-310, 5th ed. In Art. XXV, of 
Augsburg Confession, the Reformers say : " Confession is 
not abolished, but that according to custom, no one is admitted 
to the supper without Jiaviug previously confessed and received 
absolution." p. 74-75, of Baumgarten's Concordienbuch. 
"The words of absolution are to be regarded as the very 
words of God, &c. We are to believe the priest's absolu- 
tion as certainly as if we heard the voice from heaven.' y 



240 FEATURES OF THE 

p. 75. " Confession is not commanded in Scriptures ; yet it 
is to be retained on account of the absolution, which is the 
principal thing in it," &c, p. 77. 

Art. XXVIII, of Augsburg Confession, says: "Ministers 
possess the power to forgive and to retain sins." p. Ill, of Baum- 
garten. "That everlasting righteousness, the Holy Spirit, 
and eternal life cannot be obtained, except through the 
office of preaching and the reception of the sacraments." 
p. 110. "Absolution was received privately by each one in- 
dividually, kneeling before the confessional, the confessor 
imposing his hands at the time." See Funk's Kirchenord- 
nung, &c, p. 189-190. "Private Confession was to be 
given only in the church, in which the confessional was so 
located near the pulpit, that no other person could be near, 
or hear what was said, by the penitent." Idem. p. 190. 

That this practice is almost universally rejected in Ger- 
many, except by the few old Lutherans, is certain, and in 
this country universally, except by the old Lutherans of the 
West. As this will not be denied, it is unnecessary to pre- 
sent proof that private confession is not practiced in the 
American Lutheran Church. 

c) The doctrine that the true body and blood of Christ are 
received with the bread and wine by the mouth of every com- 
municant. In reference to this doctrine, the following, 
amongst many other specifications, are made in the dif- 
ferent symbolical books, to which we refer as found in 
Muller's edition. 1) "The words of the institution, 'this 
is my body,' &c, are to be understood literally, (wie sie nach 
dem Buchstaben lauten,) p. 539-647. 2) That both the 
worthy and unworthy communicants receive the true body 
and blood of Christ, (und werde nicht alien gereicht und emp- 
langen von frommen, sondern auch von bosen christen,) p. 
320, 540, 649, 660, 650. 3) That it is the omnipotence 
of Christ, which causes the presence of his body and blood 
in the eucharist, (und allein der allmachtigen Kraft unseres 
Herrn Jesu Christe zugeschrieben werden soil.") 4) That 
we receive the real body and blood of Christ. Apol. to Con- 
fession, Art. X. " The tenth article (of the Augsburg Con- 
fession) our opponents, the Papists, do not object to, in 
which we confess, that our Lord's body and blood are truly 
present in the eucharist, and are offered and received with 
the visible articles, bread and wine, as has heretofore been 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 241 

believed in the (Romish) church." p. 164. They believed 
as fully as did the Romanists, in receiving the real body and 
blood of Christ ; only they denied that the bread and wine 
were changed into such body and blood. 5) That we receive 
the body of Christ, not only spiritually but orally, p. 647- 
653. 6) That when Luther speaks of receiving the body 
of Christ "spiritually" he does not use the term in the 
sense of the Sacramentarians (or Zwinglians.) p. 668. 

On the subject of this doctrine, Melancthon himself sub- 
sequently changed his views, and in a former chapter we 
proved by the testimony of Prof. Guericke, that before 1817 
the great mass of Lutheran divines had relinquished this 
doctrine ; as also by other testimony, that it had been gen- 
erally abandoned in our church in this country. Our own 
father is regarded as among the few who yet retain some- 
thing of this view, yet he disclaims the belief of the real 
presence of the body and blood of Christ altogether, and 
believes only in a special spiritual presence arid influence ; 
and greatly deplores the movements of those who desire to 
make binding the old Lutheran view of this or any other 
non-fundamental doctrine, and thus to disturb the doctrinal 
basis of the General Synod, namely, fundamental adherence 
to the Augsburg Confession, with acknowledged liberty of 
difference on minor points. 

d) Baptismal regeneration, or the opinion that baptism is 
necessarily accompanied by spiritual regeneration, and the 
unconditional necessity of baptism to salvation, are views of 
baptism, which are taught in the Augsburg Confession, Art. 
II, IX. " This natural depravity is really sin, and still con- 
demns and causes eternal death to those who are not regen- 
erated by baptism and the Holy Spirit." But they are not 
entertained in this country, as we proved by the testimony of 
Dr. Miller, of Hartwick, p. 9, of his discourse on the Re- 
formation, of Dr. Lintner, in his notes on Auo-sburo- Confes- 
sion, p. 15, and of Dr. Bachman, in his sermon on the 
doctrines and discipline of the Lutheran church, p. 15, <fec. 

e) The mass, that is, the name and some of the ceremonies 
of the Romish mass, were retained in the Augsburg Confes- 
sion ; although the errors in doctrine, by which the Romish 
mass grew out of the scripture doctrine of ihe Lord's Sup- 
per, were rejected in that as well as subsequent symbols. 
" Our churches (says the Augsburg Confession, Art. XXIV.) 

21 



242 FEATURES OF THE 

are unjustly charged with having rejected the mass, (man 
legt den Unsern mit Unrecht auf, dasz sie die messe sollen 
abgethan haben.) For it is publicly known, that the mass 
is celebrated amongst us with greater devotion and earnest- 
ness than among our opponents." "Nor has there been 
any perceptible change made in the public ceremonies of the 
mass, except that at several places, German hymns are sung 
along with the Latin ones." " Our custom is on holy days 
(and at other times also if there be communicants) to say a 
mass, and those who desire it, receive the Lord's Supper." 
Subsequently, however, great changes were made in the pub- 
lic ceremonies attendant on the Lord's Supper ; and Luther, 
in his Smalkald Articles, rejects the mass entirely, both the 
name and accompanying ceremonies. And soon after the 
whole Lutheran church followed him. Still, if the Augs- 
burg Confession were strictly binding on us, we should be 
under the necessity of adopting on sacramental occasions all 
the public ceremonies then and now usual in the Romish 
church in celebrating public mass ! 

f) The imputation to us as personal and damning guilt of 
that natural depravity, which has come upon us in consequence 
of Adam's transgression. Luther and Melancthon both taught 
the immediate imputation of Adam's transgression to his 
descendants, and the language of Luther in his Smalkald 
Articles (Art. I.) falls very little if any thing short of it. 
He says: "We must here confess, as St. Paul says, Rom. 
v : 12, That sin is derived from one man, Adam, through 
whose disobedience all men became sinners, and were subjected 
to death and the devil." Still, the Augsburg Confession only 
represents our natural depravity as the cause of our con- 
demnation. That this doctrine has been -rejected we proved 
in parts of this work. 

We might add to this list a number of other topics taught 
by the symbolic books, and such as Luther's peculiar views 
on the mode of baptism, in his Larger Catechism, which 
were never generally adopted in the Lutheran church, even 
in Germany ; the omnipresence of the human body of Christ, 
the omniscience of his human nature, and in general the 
actual reciprocal transfer of the attributes of his human and 
divine natures to each other ; that the virgin Mary conceived 
and brought forth not a mere human being, but the veritable 
Son of God, and therefore actually is and may property be 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 243 

called the mother of God ; the sin-forgiving power of the 
ministers, (Art. XXVIII. of Augsburg Confession ;), the lax 
notions of the Augsburg Confession concerning the Christian 
Sabbath, &c, &c; but their discussion is unnecessary. 

III. Feature is the reception of the Bible, as the only infal- 
lible rule of faith aud practice, and the acknowledgment of the 
Augsburg Confession as the recognized expression only of the 
cardinal doctrines of the Bible. This is fully established by 
the action of the General Synod, in adopting the Constitu- 
tion for District Synods, in which this form of obligation is 
explicitly adopted for licensure and ordination. 

IV. Feature, Luther's Smaller Catechism, (except the 
questions on exorcism,) not as a symbolical book, but as the 
authorised book for the catechetical instruction of the young, 
yet without any prohibition of other similar works. This 
feature is proved by the action of the General Synod in 
directing its publication. 

V. Feature, the Formula for Government and Discipline, 
also proved by the action of the General Synod in preparing 
and publishing it. 

VI. Feature, A Hymn Booh — proved in like manner. 

VII. Feature, A Liturgy >, both German and English, ditto ; 
the use of w T hich is optional. . 

VIII. Feature, Catechetical Instruction of the Young; proved 
by her providing the Catechism for this express purpose, by 
the specific injunction of this duty in chapter III, sec. 6 ; 
IV, sec. 5, and sec. 10. "It shall be the duty of the church 
council to watch over the religious education of the children 
of the church, and to see that they be occasionally collected 
for the purpose of being taught the Catechism of the church, 
and instructed in the duties and principles of the Christian 
Religion." 

IX. Feature, The admission of those who had been baptized 
in infancy, to sacramental communion, by confirmation. Chap. 
IV, sec. 5, of Formula. 

X. Feature, Holding of prayer meetings and family worship. 
Formula, Chapter VII, sec. 1. "Therefore it is earnestly 
recommended to the different churches in our connexion, to 
establish and promote them (prayer meetings) among our 
members, — their object is the spiritual edification of the 
persons present ; but the utmost precaution must ever be 
observed, that God, who is a Spirit, be worshipped in suirit 



244 FEATURES OF THE 

and in truth — that these meetings be characterized by that 
solemnity and decorum, which ought ever to attend divine 
worship ; that no disorder be tolerated or any thing that is 
calculated to interrupt the devotions of those who are con- 
vened, or to prevent their giving the fullest attention to him 
who is engaged in leading the meeting ; in short, that accord- 
ing to the injunction of the Apostle, all things be done 
decently and in order." 

"It is solemnly recommended to all church members, and 
more especially to the members of the council, to make daily 
worship in their family a sacred duty." 

XI. Feature is Special Conferences, each containing from 
five to ten ministers, ordinarily to continue two days, and 
" the chief business to be performed at them is, to awaken 
and convert sinners, and to edify believers by close, practical 
preaching of the gospel." Formula, chap, xvi, § 1, 2, 3. 

XIII. The promotion of a spirit of liberality and Christian 
union on scriptural principles, among the different portions of 
our own church, and among evangelical Christian denomina 
tions in general. Formula, chap, xxi, Constitution of Gen- 
eral Synod, Art. hi, § 8. A system of Christian union, not 
proposing to amalgamate the different denominations of 
Christians, but to establish more fraternal relations between 
them by correspondence and occasional delegates, was adop- 
ted and recommended by the General Synod, and we trust 
will be adhered to. 

Having now clearly established, if we mistake not, the 
several positions propounded in the beginning of this article, 
and especially that the great mass of our churches had at 
the origin of the General Synod, rejected all those tenets of 
the former symbolical books, which they now reject, and that 
the General Synod established as her doctrinal basis funda- 
mental agreement with the Augsburg Confession, with ac- 
knovjledged liberty of difference on minor points; we close 
these articles with the earnest hope, that our ministers and 
laity will vindicate their rights as American Lutherans, and 
not suffer themselves to be deprived of their Protestant lib- 
erties, by the influence of old Lutherans, who have not yet 
been amongst us long enough to appreciate either our civil 
or religious institutions. American Lutheranism grew out 
of the Lutheran predilections of our fathers, the unrestricted 
liberty of following the scriptures, which they enjoyed in 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 245 

this Western world, and the influence of our free civil insti- 
tutions. Under this joint influence they gradually rejected 
the symbolical bondage of Germany, and restored the orig- 
inal liberty in fundamentals, which Christ and his apostles 
bequeathed to us. They bought this liberty at the price of 
great sacrifices ; and shall their American sons, that were 
"born free," suffer it to be taken from them? As the elder 
fathers who participated in the organization of the General 
Synod, have nearly all passed from the stage, we regarded 
it due to them and to the interests of truth, to contribute our 
mite to prevent the future misapprehension of their doctrinal 
position, as well as their views and motives in organ- 
izing the General Synod. Many of the relevant documents 
also have become exceedingly rare, and a few yeais more 
will sweep many of these into oblivion. As we have for 
thirty years done in regard to the Lutheran church, what 
the earliest Christian historian, Eusebius, tells us, he did in 
regard to the church of the earlier ages, namely, collected 
all the documents we could find ; it seemed desirable that 
the testimony contained in them on the points at issue, should 
be made available to the present generation of Lutherans. 
We have, therefore, spread before the church all the princi- 
pal facts in the case, and some of the reasons which led the 
General Synod to assume the enlightened and liberal, apos- 
tolic ground which she occupies ; and our confidence in the 
intelligence and enlightened piety of our ministers and laity 
is too strong to countenance a doubt, that under the guid- 
ance of the good Spirit of our God, they will manfully main- 
tain their ground. If our old Lutheran brethren are willing 
to regard their peculiarities as non-essential, and live in 
peace with us, they are welcome to take part with us in our 
ministry and ecclesiastical organizations ; but if they cannot 
refrain from either regarding or denouncing us as dishonest, 
and pseudo Lutherans, and perjured, because we do not be- 
lieve every thing contained in confessions which we never 
adopted, and because we will not adopt books as symbolical, 
which contain numerous errors and Romish superstitions ; 
for ourselves, whilst we wish them well as individuals, we ■ 
desire no ecclesiastical communion with them, either in our 
Synods, or General Synod; and believe it will be for the 
furtherance of the Gospel of Christ, that they should be 
21a 



246 AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 

associated with those who share their intolerance and big- 
otry. In less than twenty years they will themselves see 
their error, and change their position, and their children 
will be worthy members of our American Lutheran Church. 



VI. DISCOURSE. 

VOCATION OF THE AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 



The term vocation (vocatio) has, from time immemorial, 
occupied a position in the nomenclature of Systematic The- 
ology, in application to individual sinners, to designate that 
invitation given to the unconverted, by the Holy Spirit 
through the means of grace, to repent of their sins, and ac- 
cept the offers of mercy on the conditions prescribed in the 
gospel. 1 But what do we understand by the vocation of a 
church? To this question we shall, in the premises, en- 
deavor to present a generic solution, and then carry out our 
idea to its specific details, giving a tangible and visible form 
to the abstract conception. 

On another occasion, we published our convictions on the 
subject of Church Development in general ; and arrived at 
the following results : That those points of doctrine, expe- 
rience, and duty in the Christian religion, are unchangeable, 
which, in the judgment of the great mass of the Protestant 
churches, are clearly revealed in God's word, and as far as 
thus revealed ; whilst all not thus clearly determined, all in re- 
gard to which a diversity of opinion exists between the different 
Evangelical churches, are less certain, and are proper subjects 
for amicable, fraternal discussion, and progressive develop- 
ment. The points which this rule furnished as fundamental 
and unchangeable, are those enunciated by the Evangelical 
Alliance of all Protestant churches, held at London in 1846, 

(1) Thus Calovius : Vocatio ad ecclesiam est infidelium extra ecclesiam 
positorum ad ecclesiam per verbum et sacramenta a Deo ex gratia dispen- 
sata, efficax adductio. 



248 VOCATION OF THE 

and re-affirmed by the Synod of our church in Maryland, 
namely: 1, The divine inspiration, authority, and suffi- 
ciency of the Holy Scriptures; 2, the right and duty of 
private judgment in the interpretation of the Scriptures; 
3, the unity of the Godhead and the Trinity of Persons 
therein ; 4, the utter depravity of human nature in conse- 
quence of the fall ; 5, the incarnation of the Son of God, 
his work of atonement for sinners of mankind, and his me- 
diatorial intercession and reign ; 6, the justification of the 
sinner by faith alone ; 7, the work of the Holy Spirit, in 
the conversion and sanctification of the sinner ; 8, the di- 
vine institution of the Christian ministry, and the obligation 
and perpetuity of Baptism and the Lord's Supper ; and 9, 
the immortality of the soul, and the judgment of the world 
by our Lord Jesus Christ, with the eternal blessedness of 
the righteous, and eternal punishment of the wicked. These 
fundamentals stand acknowledged by Protestant Christen- 
dom, as so many imperishable pillars of the church. They 
constitute a zone of light encircling this glorious edifice, 
seen and admired by all, who do not close their eyes on its 
benignant rays. On the other hand, we maintained, that 
the appropriate and extensive field for church development, 
lies only in nonfundarnentals, in points not clearly deter- 
mined in the records of inspiration ; and that within these 
bounds the church is developed numerically, geographic- 
ally, ritually, juridically, exegetically, theologically, and 
economically. 

As the development of the church is confined to nonfun- 
damental aspects of truth, and to points not clearly settled 
in Scripture, it follows that the special vocation of every 
portion of the church, must lie in the same field, and be cir- 
cumscribed by the same metes. It is only in regard to 
points left undecided in revelation, that we can expect to 
find the lessons of instruction in the book of Providence, 
inculcating the propriety of change or amendment. In the 
progress of this development in nonfundarnentals, the par- 
ticular circumstances and incidents of the phenomenal ex- 
perience of different churches, will be found to vary. The 
character of the population, belonging to a particular branch 
of Christ's visible kingdom, may elevate or reduce the in-, 
tellectual and literary standard of her ministry, and by con- 
sequence, that of the ministrations of her sanctuaries. The 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 249 

institutions with which any particular church started in her 
career, may have derived a peculiar character from the 
government under which they were adopted, and from the 
historic influences amid which she was formed. Where ar- 
bitrary power has for ages ruled the civil destinies of a 
people, the management of her ecclesiastical, and even do- 
mestic affairs, will exhibit a correspondent impress. Even 
the constitutional peculiarities of particular controlling indi- 
viduals, who organized the elements thrown into chaotic 
disorder by the commotions of ecclesiastical revolution, 
may be traced in the creations to which they give being. 
Who does not recognize the rigid disciplinarian tendency 
of Wesley's mind, in the entire system of government and 
discipline still retained by that efficient and extended por- 
tion of the church of Christ? Or the re^al orio-in and 
aristocratic bias of the Church of England, in the strict 
gradations, and conservative tendencies of her episcopal hi- 
erarchy ; or the lingering habits of subjection to civil supe- 
riors, in the consistories and superintendences of Germany, 
notwithstanding the strong Congregational convictions of 
her leaders as to primitive Christianity ? 

Whilst, therefore, the grand vocation of all portions of 
the Christian church, is to conform their institutions to the 
word of God, and to "let their light so shine before men, 
that they may see their good works, and glorify their Father 
who is in heaven," the history of each individual cluster or 
denomination of churches, may be peculiarly adapted to 
inculcate some special lessons of instruction. The general 
vocation of the Lutheran church, in which all other churches 
participate with her, we at present pass over, and direct our 
attention to special duties inculcated by Providence, not on 
our friends in Europe, but on the American Lutheran Church. 
And when we speak of the American Lutheran Church, we 
intend not only those Synods now connected with our Gen- 
eral Synod, together with the mother Synod of Pennsylva- 
nia, by which the General Synod was mainly formed, and 
to whose influence, numerical and theological, the Constitu- 
tion of that Synod chiefly owes its enlightened and apos- 
tolic features ; but also all other Synods and individuals, 
who have acquired a proper consciousness of their concrete 
existence in this free country, and who sympathize with the 
circumstances of our times and free institutions. Nor is this 



250 VOCATION OF THE 

designation applicable only to those born in our midst, al- 
though they constitute the great mass of our church. We 
are proud also to number in our ranks many excellent and 
enlightened, and some learned men, who left the land of 
our fathers, dissatisfied with the civil and ecclesiastical con- 
dition of things, and having been conducted by the hand 
of Providence to this Western world, have not only learned 
to love the freedom and wisdom of our well-balanced civil 
institutions ; but have also attained a consciousness of the 
fact, that one grand part of the vocation of the American 
churches is, to throw off the shackles of traditionary, pa- 
tristic, and symbolic servitude ; and availing themselves of 
the liberty secured by the divorce of church and state, to 
review the ground of Protestant organization, and to resume 
the Scripture lineaments of Christianity. Yea, we number 
men of high standing amongst us, who, under the evangeli- 
cal influence of our liberal ecclesiastical arrangements, have 
gradually cast off the impressions of a perverted and neo- 
logical education, and cordially adopting the grand funda- 
mentals of Gospel truth, stand forth in defence of evangelical 
but enlightened Christianity : men, who aim to improve our 
church, not merely by a recurrence to the principles of the 
Reformation, but also by going higher, and drawing from 
the very fountains of sacred truth and love, whence the re- 
formers themselves derived those streams that refreshed 
and enlightened the benighted and priest-ridden nations of 
Europe ; men, too enlightened and well acquainted with the 
whole field of theological science, to suppose that the three 
eventful centuries since the Reformation, had made no pro- 
gress in knowledge, had reflected no light upon the path, 
on which the church is to travel onward to her appointed 
destiny. 

In Germany the church is still hampered by her relation 
to the State, to which the majority of the truly pious un- 
wisely cling. She has thus been prevented from settling 
down on the improved results of a scriptural development, 
which would have dictated the separation of the fundamen- 
tally orthodox from every species of neologians. Had the 
church in Germany been separated from the State, and all 
the pious united into one church, adopting merely the three 
ancient creeds, the Apostolical, the Mcene, and the Athan- 
asian, and required a rigid bona fide assent to them, with a 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 251 

scriptural system of church discipline ; the divine power of 
the Gospel would not only have soon given preponderance 
to this emancipated and apostolic church, and spread her 
influence over the whole land : but she would actually have 
possessed far more doctrinal purity than at present ; for now 
every form of heresy, from the mildest Semipelagianism to 
the rankest Socinianism and Deism, Communism and Pan- 
theism, are found within her pale. And should even the 
Augsburg Confession and Heidelburg Catechism have been 
added, with the express proviso, that any person holding 
the tenets of either of these symbols, or a selection from 
both, should be regarded in good standing in the renovated 
church, all insuperable difficulties would have been re- 
moved. A separation would thus be effected betwesn the 
neologians and orthodox, distinct churches would be organ- 
ized, and experience would soon prove, that the neological 
religious consciousness sits too loosely on the mind, to urge 
its subjects to a voluntary support of their ministry ; whilst 
the friends of Jesus would there, as in our own country, 
in England, and Scotland, give a moderate, though ad- 
equate support to those ministrations of the sanctuary, with 
which they believe their salvation closely connected. But, 
hitherto, the attachment to state establishments, conflicting 
pecuniary interests, and the lingering spirit of sectarianism, 
have frustrated this happy result. From the bottom of our 
hearts we say, both in regard to Germany and our own 
country, Faxit Deus feliciter. 

But in our own happy land, in which all can worship God 
unmolested, under their own vine and fig tree ; in this asy- 
lum for the oppressed of all nations, this heaven-appointed 
theatre for the free development of man in his social, civil, 
and religious interests, our church, standing on her high 
vantage ground, should review the past, carefully ponder 
the lessons it teaches, and maintain a position, which, whilst 
it is firmly based on the fundamentals of the Gospel, adds 
only those peculiarities of our ecclesiastical ancestors, which 
have generally commended themselves to the enlightened, 
orthodox, and pious portions of our church, and vindicates 
a rational liberty on all other points. What are the great 
landmarks of this position, how it can best be secured, and 
in how far it has been attained by our General Synod, are 



252 VOCATION OF THE 

points which will be more clearly perceived in the progress 
of our discussion. 

I. Since, as eldest sister of the Reformation, our church 
was first to express the grand Protestant principle of exclu- 
sive, infallible authority of the Bible, in antithesis to tradition 
and human authority, and yet was prevented from carrying 
it out to its legitimate sequences ; it is part of her vocation to 
complete the work so happily begun. 

The sufficiency of a revelation from Heaven, without the 
auxiliary light of tradition, is the natural corollary of its di- 
vinity itself. The very reason which rendered the one ne- 
cessary, implies the invalidity of the other. If uninspired 
human teachings had been reliable, as sources of new truth, 
a revelation would have been superfluous. Hence the fact, 
that God inspired holy men of old to speak as the Spirit 
guided them, seems to establish the insufficiency of mere 
uninspired human deduction. But this word of revelation 
being admitted as divine, its own declarations must forever 
settle this point. The same inspired Apostle who declared 
all Scripture to be divinely inspired, (dsowsugog) and able 
not only to subserve some purposes of the man of God, but 
to make him "perfect," thoroughly furnished, not only for 
some, but ''for all good works;" has also explicitly pro- 
nounced the Holy Scriptures competent to teach us the su- 
preme and vital interests of man, "able to make us wise 
unto salvation." Whilst he warns us to beware of any and 
every teacher, even if it were an angel from heaven, who 
should preach any other doctrine than that taught by him- 
self, (and contained in his epistles,) and whilst he pro- 
nounces the curse of God upon him ; the disciple whom 
Jesus loved, in the book placed last in the canonical collec- 
tion, whether last written or not, adds the fearful menace : 
" if any one shall add unto these things, God shall add unto 
him the plagues that are written in this book." Since, then, 
it is evident that God designed his revelation to be as com- 
plete as it is infallible, to be the standing and only certain 
guide to his church in all ages ; we urge the inquiry upon 
every ingenuous mind, upon every true disciple of our 
blessed Master, and especially upon ministers of the Gos- 
pel, what should be our unflinching determination on this 
subject? Certainly, that which the noble minded Luther 
and his Spartan band of coadjutors adopted, to adhere to 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 253 

the word of God, in opposition not only to angels and devils, 
but to popes, cardinals and councils, whenever, in our judg- 
ment, they come in conflict with this divinely authenticated 
voice of Heaven. "No man (said Luther) can or ought 
to doubt, that every thing contrary to the commands of 
God, whether it be living or dying, taking a vow or becom- 
ing free, speaking or remaining silent, is to be condemned, 
and by all means to be abandoned, changed and avoided. 
For the will of God must be supreme, and must be done in 
heaven and on earth. Matth. 6: 10." And if the profes- 
sions of any man were ever put to the test, Luther's were 
at the memorable diet of Worms, when summoned to recant 
his doctrines before that august court of the empire. His 
truly sublime answer, synonymous with that of the apos- 
tle's to the Jewish Sanhedrim, and given when he expected 
'it would cost his life, has for three centuries been the sub- 
ject of admiration to the civilized world: "Except I can 
be convinced by clear and conclusive reasoning, or by 
proofs taken from the Holy Scriptures, I neither can nor 
will recant ; because it is neither safe nor advisable to do 
any thing which is against my conscience. Here I stand, 
I cannot do otherwise, God help me ! Amen." The same 
principle he has expressed in various parts of his works. 
One or two passages must suffice. "Hitherto," says he, 
"all cases which arose concerning true and false doctrine, 
were referred to a council, or to the Pope at Rome, or to 
the universities, which were to be umpires. But these are 
not Gilead, they have misled and deceived us. But the 
Holy Scriptures pronounce the decision, as to whose instruc- 
tions are correct or erroneous. For although the Holy 
Ghost instructs every one in his heart, so that he knows 
what is right ; it is still necessary to resort to the Scriptures, 
in order to prove the accuracy of our views. It is the 
Scriptures which decide whether our faith is correct or not. 
Therefore, we can look for no farther evidence, either of 
the fathers or councils ; but must adhere exclusively to the 
clear declarations of Scripture." ! Again, " God's word is 
the only certain rule which cannot deceive us." 2 Once 
more: "The right of free judgment we must retain, so as 
not to suffer ourselves to be bound indiscriminately by what 

(1) Luther's Works, Walch's edit. vol. 3, p. 754. 

(2) Vol. 1, p. 1854. 

22 



254 VOCATION OF THE 

the councils or fathers have taught ; but we must make this 
difference : if they have decided and appointed any thing 
according to God's word, we also receive it, not on their 
account, but on account of the same divine word, on which 
they rest, and to which they refer us." 1 Here, then, wo 
have a distinct avowal of the paramount and exclusively in- 
fallible authority of the Scriptures, an avowal in direct con- 
flict with the oath which he had taken when he was created 
Doctor of Divinity, in which he "had solemnly sworn "to 
obey the church of Rome, and not to teach any doctrines con- 
demned by her.y 1 

And it shall be supposed that he, whose sublime principles 
thus elevated him above the fate of emperors and kings, and 
cardinals and popes, contended against popes and bishops 
only to occupy their station himself, and wield a similar au- 
thority ? That he who was so evidently guided by the fear of 
God, when contending against the decrees of councils, the 
authority of the fathers, and the bulls of popes, did so in 
order that men should bow to his opinions- and make him the 
subject of similar idolatry ? No, he neither did so himself, 
nor did others attempt it during his lifetime. It was not 
until more than a quarter of a century after his death, that 
not the church or body of believers ; but some secular princes 
usurping authority not confided to them by God, together 
with some learned and excellent, but mistaken theologians, 
undertook to prescribe a doctrinal test to ministers in gen- 
eral, and thus dictate to them not only the general and fun- 
damental doctrines of Christianity, but an extended detail 
of particulars, in one case at least, commanding the belief 



(1) Idem, vol. ix. p. 631. 

(2) As this oath is a literary curiosity, we subjoin it in the original, for 
the gratification of our learned readers: ''Ego juro Domino Decauo et 
Magistris Facultatis Theologise obedientiam et reverentiam debitam, et in 
quocunque statu utilitatem universitatis, et maxime Facultatis Theologicse, 
pro virili mea procurabo, et omnes actus theologicos exercebo in mitra, 
(nisi fuerit religiosus) vanas. peregrinas doctrinas, ab ecclesia damnatas, 
et piarilm aurium offensivas non dogmatisabo, sed dogmatisantem Dn. 
Decano denunciabo intra octendium, et manutenebo consuetudines liber- 
tates et privilegia Theologies; Facultatis pro virili mea, ut me Deus adju- 
vet, et Sanctorum evangeliorum conditores. Juro etiam Romance ecclesia 
obedientiam. et procurabo pacem inter Magistros et Scholasticos seculares 
et religiosos, et bi return in nullo alio gymnasio recipiam." Lib. Statuto- 
rum facultatis theol. Academiee Wittemberg. Cap. 7. 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 25& 

of a doctrine from which Luther had receded, the ubiquity 
or omnipresence of Christ's body ! Yes, let it ever be re- 
membered that Luther himself was no symbolic Lutheran, 
and that this whole system of minute confessional servitude, 
was riveted on the church long after Luther and Melancthon 
had been translated to a better world. 

But although these two distinguished servants of Christ, 
guided by their supreme reverence for the Bible, accom- 
plished wonders in casting off the major part of the errors 
and prejudices of their Romish education ; they did not live 
to complete the work, nor had they power to introduce all 
the reforms, the necessity of which had become clear to their 
vision. They were therefore alike too wise and too humble, 
to desire the stadium of their attainments to be the ne plus 
ultra of reform. Against the practice of designating the 
'church of the Reformation by his name, Luther protested in 
the most energetic manner, alledging it to be a repetition of 
Corinthian sectarianism, condemned by Paul. " The Pa- 
pists," says he, "may well have party names, because they 
are not satisfied with the doctrines and names of Christ, and 
desire also to be popish. Then let them be called after the 
Pope, who is their master. But I am not and will not be 
any one's master" Yet it was not only against this abuse of 
his name, that the noble-hearted Luther protested ; it was 
far from his desire that his writings should be invested with 
binding authority on his successors. " If any person," said 
he in the latter part of his life, (1539,) "desires to have 
my writings, let him by til means not suffer them to inter- 
fere with his study of the scriptures themselves, but treat 
them as I do the papal decrees, and the works of the soph- 
ists, that is, though I occasionally look into them to see what 
they have done, or to take an account of the history of the 
times, it is not for the purpose of studying them, as though 
I must act according to their views." ' "I have no cata- 
logue of my works, and not even all the books themselves, 
and I would much rather that men would read the Bible 
alone, instead of my works." 2 And finally he says, " Read 
my books, compare them with the writings of our opponents, 
and both with the scriptures, and then judge them according 
to this touchstone." 3 

(1) Preface to his German Works. (2) Letter to Ursinus. 

(3) Lnther's Works, 3d vol., p. 256. 



256 FEATURES OF THE 

It is therefore the duty of Christians of the present day, 
and especially of this favored country, where liberty of 
conscience is our birthright, to act on the noble principles 
adopted by these reformers, and to produce them to practice 
in those cases also, in which their Romish education prevent- 
ed them from doing so. It is the special vocation of the 
American Lutheran church to forsake, as she has done, 
those remnants of Romanism and also those anti-papal 
superstitions which the church of Rome had borrowed from 
the earlier fathers, and which the first reformers failed to 
renounce. It is our vocation to cast off all regard for the 
authority of the fathers, Nicene and Anti-Nicene, Romish 
and Protestant, excepting what justly attaches to them on 
account of the intrinsic force of their arguments, or their 
character and opportunities as witnesses of facts ; for no 
point in patristic theology is more fully established than the 
numerous and serious aberrations of even some of the ear- 
liest so-called fathers from the truth of God. Yea, it is cer- 
tain, that the whole of them as a body are not more reliable 
as expositors of scripture than the same number of respect- 
able authors in the different evangelical churches of our 
day. It is our duty to do as Luther did, to look up through 
the long vista of antiquity to the era of the apostles, and 
from that high standpoint to form a scriptural judgment not 
only of the corruptions of Rome, but of the doctrines and 
practice of all past ages. Had Luther acted on the princi- 
ples of many now bearing his name, he would have founded 
his Christianity and the organization of his church on the 
basis of his great theological favorite, Augustine. He would 
have selected one or more of his works, either that entitled 
" Be Civitate Dei," in which he defends the Christian reli- 
gion against the heathen, or more probably his "Enchiridion 
(or Manual) ad Laurentium, sive defide, spe et caritate liher," 
in which he gives an account of his doctrinal views and 
those of the church. This he would have made symbolical, 
pledging himself to abide by its contents for life, and bind- 
ing all who united with his ministry to the same produc- 
tion. And this church he would have baptized as the Au- 
gustinian church. But no, Luther had not so learned Christ. 
He could discriminate between inspired and uninspired wri- 
tings, between the books of God and those of men. Whilst, 
therefore, he avowed his assent to the three ecumenical 



■^^^^"" 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 257 

creeds, the Apostolic, the Nicene and the Athanasian, which 
are confined to fundamentals, and are very short, he never 
adopted as binding any extended creed, nor suffered any 
human productions to deprive him of that liberty conceded 
by the word of God. He continued through life to improve 
his views of doctrine and duty, by the light of scripture, 
and in the most emphatic language inculcated on others the 
obligation to do likewise. That he was intolerant to Zwingli, 
and his followers, belongs to the imperfections of the age 
and of the man, not to his general principles of action. 
Temporum culpa fuit, non ejus. And were he still living 
we doubt not, he would hurl his denunciation at the intole- 
rant ultra-Lutherans of our day, as he did at Carlstadt and 
Zwingli of old, only, by this time, in milder phrase. 

How completely our General Synod has fulfilled her voca- 
tion in this respect, is evident from the fact that she makes 
no reference to the fathers, ancient or modern, thus leaving 
them all to stand on their intrinsic merits as theological 
authority, and as witnesses to historical facts ; whilst the 
former symbolical books, after having pronounced the fath- 
ers fallible, nevertheless cite their views and arguments in 
multitudes of cases. 

II. As she has experienced the baneful effects of transfunda- 
mental and very extended creeds, it is her vocation to correct the 
evil. 

We have seen that Luther never desired any of his publi- 
cations to be binding on others. Still farther was any dis- 
position of this kind, removed from the mind of the unas- 
suming Melancthon. All those publications of theirs, which 
were afterwards made symbolical, were composed and pub- 
lished for other puposes. How then did it happen, that 
these publications assumed so unexpected a character ? The 
true state of the facts in the case is, we think, given by Dr, 
Ecellner, in his Symbolik. 1 "The symbolical books, (as 
they are afterwards styled, ) were at first merely an expres- 
sion of what was believed, and afterwards they became the 
rule of what must be believed. But when, and how this 
was first done, by public authority, it is very difficult to de- 
termine. The traces and evidences of it are often fallacious ; 

(1) Vol. I, p. 106,107. 

22a. 



258 VOCATION OF THE 

because cases in which such a subscription to a creed was 
merely requested and voluntarily given, may easily be ad- 
duced as cases in which the subscription was commanded. 
It however appears to be true, that some individual symbols 
had so much authority attributed to them, as to be recom- 
mended as rules of faith and of instruction, and in some 
instances also commanded, long before the formation of the 
Form of Concord," (which was half a century after the 
publication of the Augsburg Confession.) "Nevertheless 
this does not appear to have occurred everywhere at the 
same time, nor in the same manner ; nor does the principle 
of binding men to the symbols, seem to have been a univer- 
sal and prevailing one, prior to the formation of the Form 
of Concord in 1580, or before the prevalence of the contro- 
versies which originated from its formation. But a change 
took place about the time the Form of Concord was com- 
posed, and on account of its formation and after it. Prior 
to this time, some cases had occurred of oppressive coercion 
in matters of faith, and of compulsory adoption of the sym- 
bols as a rule of faith and instruction ; but afterwards they 
became more numerous." These positions of Dr. Koellner 
sustains by numerous authorities, which even fix the precise 
time, when, at different places, the custom of demanding 
assent to these symbols was first introduced. It seems evi- 
dent, therefore, that the habit of ascribing normative or 
binding authority to these books, though in a few instances 
it was done at an early day, was of gradual growth, and 
did not become general for half a century after the Augsburg 
Confession was published and used as an expose or profession 
of faith, and many years after the death of Luther. 

It was the mistaken impression, that a general introduction 
and more stringent exaction of assent to these books, and the 
fabrication of another determining the several disputed points 
left free in them, would secure peace, that led to the forma- 
tion of the Form of Concord, and to the imposition on the 
church, of the .whole system of symbolic oppression. Whilst 
we deny the wisdom and dispute the Scripture authority of 
the political rulers of a country to impose any, much less 
such extended confessions of faith on their subjects ; we, 
nevertheless, do not doubt the upright and benevolent inten- 
tion of the Elector Augustus of Saxony, and of John Wil- 
liam, Duke of Weimar, in ordering their principal theologians 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 259 

to Altenburg, to deliberate on the best method of termina- 
ting these disputes : nor of the Duke of Wurtemberg, and of 
Julius, Duke of Brunswick, in imposing on the distinguished 
James Andrese of Tubingen and his associates, the duty of 
preparing the Form of Concord, which was finally adopted, 
and together with all the other symbolical books, made 
binding in their territory, June 25th, 1580. Nor do we 
hesitate to concede the purity of those distinguished divines, 
who cordially co-operated in this work, That diversity of 
opinion existed among the followers of Luther,- on different 
points of nonfundamental importance, is historically certain ; 
and when his death removed that restraint, which his per- 
sonal influence and energy of character had imposed on 
them, they gave free utterance to their opinions. A very 
large proportion of the divines rejected Luther's view of the 
•bodily presence in the Lord's Supper, and coincided more 
or less with that of Melanchthon. It is also certain, that 
their wily enemies, the Catholics, were employing these 
differences as arguments to urge upon the Emperor the 
revocation of the treaty of peace of 1555, which limited 
toleration to those, who worshipped according to the Augs- 
burgh Confession. 1 This was, however, only a pretext, and 
would not have induced the Emperor to venture on such a 
step, until political reasons inclined him to it. When this 
contingency actually did arise, about forty years afterward, 
the forcible extinction of Protestantism was attempted by 
fire and sword, although the Form of Concord had driven 
from the bosom of the Lutheran church, the great mass of 
those who could not embrace all the peculiarities of the 
Augsburg Confession. We strongly favor the opinion, that 
the adoption of a liberal platform, by uniting the two great 
branches of the Protestant church, or rather by preventing 
in a great degree the schism itself, would have presented so 
formidable a front, as to have prevented the " Thirty years' 
War." 

But that the adoption of the Form of Concord, and with 
it that unreasonably extended symbolic system, however 

(1) The fourth article of the treaty was in these words : " Attamen ceteri 
onmes, qui alteri prscnominatarum harum binarum religionurn (that is, the 
Lutheran and Catholic) non sint adhsererentes, sub hac pace non compre- 
hensi. sed plane exclusi esse debant." For Zwinglians and Calvinists there 
was no toleration in this treaty. 



260 VOCATION OF THE 

well-intended, was a mistaken step, is evident from various 
considerations. It may justly be objected that the Scriptures 
have furnished us no confession of faith, an omission that 
was certainly not accidental, if their inspiration be conceded. 
Nor have they conferred authority on any one, to impose 
such a yoke upon the church, or to abridge her liberty in 
nonessentials. The only grounds which justify the adoption 
of even a short creed, are to exclude fundamental errorists, 
those who deny that Jesus is the Christ, or reject any other 
vital truth of the Gospel, and to produce uniformity suffi- 
cient for harmonious co-operation. Accordingly, during the 
golden age of Christianity, under the guidance of the apos- 
tles and their successors, the church for three centuries had 
no other creed than that termed the Apostolic and then the 
Nicene Creed. It was the opinion of the Nicene fathers 
who framed that creed, that its specifications were sufficiently 
ample for all practical purposes. Athanasius himself the 
Coryphaeus of the orthodox party in that council, thus une- 
quivocally expresses their conviction : "H yap iv aurvj Trapot 
<rwv tfars'pwv xotra rag ^slag ypacpag oixoXoy^sTcfa rtigig,. 
dvTOLpXYis sg't tfpo£ avarpo<n"r]v fxsv tfktirig atfsfisiag, (fvg'arfiv 8s 
<rv]£ su&sfisiaS sv Xpig*<p iflgiug? (For the faith avowed' in it 
by those fathers in conformity to the word of God, is suffi- 
cient for the subversion of all impiety and for the establish- 
ment of all godliness, and of the faith in Christ.) The 
Emperor Zeno also wrote an epistle, urging all the discordant 
parties to unite on this creed, promising in that event to 
hold communion with them, and added that the church 
should never receive any other symbol than that framed by the 
Nicene. fathers? But whilst the above named considerations 
justify these brief summaries of faith, and a moderate cnten- 
sion of them, so as to exclude all subsequent fundamental 
errorists ; they by no means establish the propriety of that 
vastly extended collection of symbols adopted by the Lu- 
theran princes some time after Luther's death, which deprived 
that church of all reasonable liberty in points of minor 
importance. 

That our view of the inexpediency of such extended creeds 
is just, may also be inferred from the circumstance that the 
major part of all these Lutheran symbols was rejected by 

(1) Evag. Lib. III. c. 14. (2) Taylor's Liberty of Propbecying, p. .72. 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 261 

one or more of the Lutheran kingdoms, even when they did 
not in all cases dissent from the doctrines taught in them. 
Indeed, as Dr. Base justly remarks : " The Augsburg Con- 
fession is the only one of them all, that was received thoughout 
the entire Lutheran Church" Yet strange to tell, some of 
our native Americans exhibit less love for their liberty of 
conscience, than the subjects of the regal and despotic gov- 
ernments of the old world ! I. The Form of Concord was. 
rejected by the kingdom of Denmark. "The king, though 
invited to adopt it, refused to do so, by advice of his clergy, 
who disapproved of it, because peace and unity of doctrine 
prevailed in his dominions, and he feared its introduction 
would create strife aud divisions. So bitterly was the king 
himself opposed to it, that he took the copy (decorated with 
pearls and gold) which had been sent to him from Germany, 
and cast it into the fire." 1 It subsequently acquired more 
popularity, but was never publicly acknowledged as sym- 
bolical. 2 The kingdom of Sweden did not receive the form 
of Concord, nor concede proper symbolic authority to the 
other symbolical books, except the Augsburg Confession. 3 
Still at a later period, (1593) the Form of Concord received 
a tolerably formal acknowledgment, (ziemlich formlich An- 
erkennung). 4 It was also rejected by Hessia, Pomerania, 
Holstein, (for more than half a century), Anhcdt, and the 
cities Frankfort, Speier, Worms, Xurnberg, Madgeburg, Bre* 
men, Danzig, &c. 6 II. The Smalcald Articles were rejected 
by the Lutheran church in Sweden and Denmark. In 
Sweden the symbolic books generally are now regarded as 
an authorized explanation of the Lutheran faith ; yet the 
symbolical books of the Danish church, lately published, 
like those of the Swedish church in 1644, (entitled Con- 
fession of the Swedish faith, approved by the council of 
Upsal in 1593,) contains only the so-called Apostles' Creed, 
the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, and the Augsburg 
Confession, to which the Danish Confession adds the Smaller 
Catechism of Luther. Both these collections exclude the 
Smalcald Articles. Guericke's Symb. p. 67, and his History, 

(1) Kollner's Symbolik, vol. I. p. 575, 576. 

(2) Baumgarten's Concordien-bach, p. 184-185. Mosh. Eccles. Hist, 
vol. IIT. p. 155, Dr. Murdock's edit. 

(3) Hutterus Redivivus. p. 116. 

(4) Guericke's Symb. 2d ed. p. 112-113. (5) Kollner, p. 577. 



262 VOCATION OF THE 

first ed. p. 807. III. The Apology to the Augsburg Con- 
fession was denied official symbolic authority, by Sweden 
and Denmark. Guericke sup. cit. IV. The Larger Cate- 
chism of Luther was denied formal symbolic authority in 
Sweden and Denmark. Yet in both these kingdoms these 
Catechisms are highly prized, and the Smaller, if we mis- 
take not, is used for the instruction of youth. Guericke, p. 
113. Here, then, we 'behold the judgment of about one 
half of the different Lutheran kingdoms and principalities 
of Europe, announced in the most unequivocal and em- 
phatic manner, in opposition to this extensive system of 
symbolic restriction ; given too when these parties were 
fresh from the scenes of the Reformation, and warm in the 
principles by which that glorious moral revolution had been 
achieved. Surely these .lessons of instruction ought to be 
heeded by the friends of reviving Lutheranism in Germany, 
and still more by those in this country who were "born 
free," but some of whom, from a zeal for Lutheranism, 
sincere we doubt not, but mistaken, seem disposed to sell 
their birthright. 

Again, the infelicity of this Procustean symbolic system, 
which was completed by the Form of Concord, is demon- 
strated from its having cost the Lutheran church a large por- 
tion of her ecclesiastical territory, estimated at about one-fourth 
of all her churches in Germany ! It drove off two numerous 
classes of persons, those who believed in the real presence 
as Luther did, but with him also rejected the ubiquity of 
the Saviour's glorified body ; and those who agreed with 
Melanchthon on the Lord's Supper, as well as on some other 
topics, but wished to remain in the Lutheran church, as 
Melanchthon had done. 

Had the civil rulers and their theologians been satisfied 
with the Augsburg Confession, and conceded liberty on all 
points, left undecided that symbol, the Reformed church 
would probably never have gained a foothold in Germany. 
In 1580, when the Form of Concord was proclaimed, there 
were but two Reformed congregations in all Germany, 
namely those of Bremen and Neustadt. But such was the 
unpopularity of this book, that in consequence of it and 
other related causes, in thirty years about one-fourth of the 
Lutheran churches in Germany had gone over to the Re- 
formed communion. If it be objected, that the peculiar 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 263 

views of Luther on some points would have been abandoned, 
if they had not been stereotyped in a creed, and conformity 
to them been exacted by the civil authority ; we reply, this 
would not have been the case to any considerable extent. 
But if any of the peculiar views of Luther should prove 
unable to sustain themselves in fair and equal conflict on 
the ground of reason and Scripture, the presumption would 
arise, that they are destitute of scriptural foundation, and 
on Luther's own principles, ought to be abandoned. The 
exaction of the Form of Concord, however, robbed the 
church of her liberty on many points not decided in the 
Confession of Augsburg, and thus drove thousands away 
from the Lutheran communion, either because they could 
not conscientiously adopt all the specifications of the new 
symbol, or if they did believe them, regarded it as unjust to 
condemn their brethren, and eject them from the church, 
because of non-essential differences of opinion. Indeed, 
had Luther and Melanchthon lived at that time, they would 
both have been excluded by this creed from the church 
which they founded, the former for not believing the ubiquity 
of the Saviour's body, and the latter for rejecting that and 
several other opinions affirmed in it; for as the distinguished 
historian, Dr. Staudlin justly observes: "This creed made 
binding the doctrinal system of the rigid Lutherans, which 
went beyond the doctrines of Luther himself, (welche selbst 
uber Luther's Lehren hinausgegangen waren), and took 
cognizance of all the controverted points, which had previ- 
ously been discussed." 1 

In confirmation of our position we shall advance the tes- 
timony of but two historians. Touching the effects of the 
Form of Concord, Dr. Henke says : "But the most lament- 
able consequence of the book of Concord was, that whilst 
the number of new Reformed churches was constantly increas- 
ing in Germany, (for previously there were but two, namely 
in Bremen and in Neustadt on the Hardt), the mutual sec- 
tarian hatred of both Protestant parties was visibly increased, 
their interests were divided, and their mutual security jeop- 
arded." 2 And the celebrated Lutheran historian, Dr. 
Plank, in his excellent and able History of Protestant 

(1 ) Staudlin's Universal Geschichte der Christlichen Kirche, p. 308. 

(2) Henke, vol. III. p. 464. 



264 VOCATION OF THE 

Theology, 1 thus distinctly sustains our position: "This 
alone could be the result, and this alone was the result 
(namely of the adoption of the Form of Concord), that not 
only a number of individual theologians, but also a number 
of whole churches, which had hitherto belonged to the 
Lutheran party, gradually approximated nearer to the Cal- 
vinists, and soon formally and fully united with them. In 
the year 1580, at the time of the publication of the Formula, 
there were but two churches in Germany that had positively 
declared themselves for the Calvinistic doctrine on the 
Lord's Supper. At the close of the century, however, and 
therefore within the next twenty or thirty years, perhaps 
fully one-fourth of all the Protestant churches in the empire, 
had given in their full adhesion to this party. This was 
such a natural consequence, that it could not fail to follow. 
Already during the preliminary negotiations which had 
been conducted before the publication of the Formula, on 
the subject of its adoption, the ministers of a number of 
churches, as for instance of Hesse Cassel, of Nassau, of 
Anhalt, and of Zweibrucken, had declared in the most pos- 
itive manner, that they never would submit to having the 
hypothesis of Christ's ubiquity forced upon them, either as 
a collateral idea in the doctrine of the Supper, or as a dis- 
tinctive idea of the doctrine of the person of Christ. Yet 
these very churches in part declared just as decidedly, that 
they had every disposition to retain and profess the true 
Lutheran presence of Christ, as contained in the language 
of the Augsburg Confession and that of the unaltered edition. 
It thus happened, and that too in the natural course of things, 
that the very party which they had desired more particu- 
larly to suppress by means of the Form of Concord, that 
the Calvinistic party, now for the first time obtained such a 
footing, that the continuance of its existence was secured 
forever in Germany.'" 

Assuredly, then, the fact that this extended symbolic 
system drove from the Lutheran church in Germany one- 
fourth of all her congregations, and was rejected by one-half 
of the kingdoms and principalities constituting the great 
Lutheran brotherhood, whose history fills so large a space 

(1) Page 19. 20, 21, and also p. 420 and 421 of this Keriew, where the 
entire passage will be found. 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 265 

in the annals of Europe during the last three centuries, 
should lead those amongst us, who have, without the most 
careful and extensive examination of the subject, eulogised 
this Form of Concord, to reflect. We know the impartiality 
of Dr. Plank has been called in question, but it is in vain. 
The undeniable facts of history establish his positions. It 
will not be supposed, that all those kingdoms and principal- 
ities rejected those books out of love to them, and refused 
to concede to them symbolic authority because they thought 
them fully deserving of it. And that they did reject them 
cannot and will not be denied. The testimony of Dr. Plank 
is, therefore, true, and facts will bear out the distinguished 
historian, Dr. Shroeck, in his honorable tribute to the merits 
of Dr. Plank: "The history of the Form of Concord, pub- 
lished by Anthon, deacon at Schmiedberg, in Electoral 
Saxony, is elaborated from the best of sources with much 
industry and accuracy. But here, also, as in the history 
of the antecedent controversies, Dr. Plank has surpassed 
his predecessors in acute penetration and impartial judg- 
ment." 1 

That this extended symbolic system was a mistaken one, 
is further evident from the fact, that it failed to exclude dis- 
putes and differences from the churchy even where fully 
adopted ; and infused greater acerbity of spirit into those 
controversies which occurred. Who that is acquainted with 
the history of those times, does not know, that whilst the 
adoption and enforcement of the Form of Concord and 
other confessions, decided what should thenceforth be re^ 
garded as authorized Lutheranism on many minor points, 
which had before been left free, thus giving greater fixed- 
ness and detail to the symbolical system ; it nevertheless 
failed to alter the convictions of those, whose views it con^ 
demned. Some of the very princes and theologians who 
had advocated its formation, were dissatisfied with it when 
finished. Such was the case of Julius, Duke of Brunswick, 
and his theologians. "In Saxony itself," says Dr. Mosheim, 
"not a few detested in their hearts, that Formula which 
they subscribed with their hands, holding fast the doctrines 

(1) Schroeck's Kirchengeschichte, Vol. iv. pp. 648, 649. "Aber auch 
Her wie in tier Gescbichte der vorhergehenden Streitigkeiten hat Herr 
Consist. Rath Plank, durch eindringende Scharfsicht und unparteiisehe 
Wurdigung seine Vorgangcr ubertroffen." 
23 



266 VOCATION OF THE 

which they had received from Melancthon and his friends." 
On the accession of Christian I, they aimed at the rejection 
of the Form of Concord, the omission of exorcism in the 
Form of Baptism, and in general, the dissemination of Me- 
lancthonian views. As to the century immediately follow- 
ing the adoption of this extended symbolical system, the 
distinguished historian just cited, employs the following 
language : "During this whole century (the 17th,) the Lu- 
theran church was greatly agitated; partly by controversies 
among the principal doctors, to the great injury of the whole 
community ; and partly by the extravagant zeal and plans of 
certain persons, who disseminated new and strange opin- 
ions, uttered prophecies, and attempted to change all our 
doctrines and institutions. The controversies which drew 
the doctors into parties, may be fitly divided into the greater 
and the less ; the former such as disturbed the whole church, 
and the latter such as disquieted only some parts of it." 1 
False as is the charge of the Romish Stanislaus Rescius, 
that the Lutheran church had, in less than a century, given 
birth to two hundred and seventy sects, 2 there is but too 
much truth in the gloomy picture drawn by that master of 
ecclesiastical history, Dr. Mosheim. Of similar import is 
the testimony of Dr. Henke : "The Form of Concord," 
says he, "much rather gave rise to new cases of discord. 
Papal divines rejoiced, and ridiculed as well this peace mea- 
sure, as the contentions which it was designed to settle, but 
which it only aggravated." Indeed, the bare enumeration 
of these controversies, the Melancthonian, or Crypto- Calvin- 
istic, the Zwinglian, the Calixtine, the Synergistic, the Helm- 
stadian, the Pietist ic controversies, together with those 
concerning the Ubiquity or omnipresence of Christ's body, 
and the Hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ, and 
many others, will suffice to establish the position we affirm, 
whilst they stand as lasting monuments of the futility of 
extended creeds, either to prevent controversy or to pro- 
mote unity of sentiment. Yea, instead of casting oil upon 
the troubled waters, this extended symbolic system did but 
agitate the church more, and divert her attention alike from 
her spiritual growth within, and from efforts to continue 

(1) Mosheim, vol. Ill, p- 157 of Mnrdock's ed. 

(2) In his Tractatus de Atheismis and Phalarismis Evangelicorum, p. 
327. Kocher, p. 213. 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 267 

her extension without. The extent and engrossing charac- 
ter of these intellectual conflicts, may be read in the fact, 
that on a single one of these disputes, the hypostatic or per' 
sonal union of the two natures in Christ, about two thous- 
and works were published ; ' and that distinguished servant 
of Christ, Augustus Hermann Francke, was formally charged 
with thirty heresies ! ! Numerous other testimonies might 
be adduced, to prove the augmented intensity given to these 
controversies by the adoption of these symbolic books ; but 
it is self-evident to every intelligent mind, that when a con- 
troverted topic is made the subject of symbolic decision, 
and the divines holding one opinion are in danger of losing 
their living, and of seeing their families robbed of bread, 
the discussions will acquire a double violence from the self- 
interest necessarily involved in the result. 

Finally, the inaptitude of this extended symbolic system 
is loudly proclaimed by the fact, that even in those coun- 
tries which did receive all these books, not only the neolo- 
gians, but the great majority of those who adhere to the fun- 
damental doctrines of the Bible, have renounced the symbolic 
authority of these writings, and regard them as in many points 
defective exhibitions of divine truth. In not a single kingdom 
or principality of Germany, is unqualified assent to them 
any longer required. On this subject, let us again listen to 
the testimony of Dr. Kollner, Professor of Theology in 
Leipsic, an author whose statement of historical facts can- 
not be successfully impugned. In his recent work on Sym- 
bolics, he says: 2 "That these symbolical books actually 
teach the doctrines of the Scriptures, is confessedly a point 
disputed not only by many, but by a majority of the minis- 
ters of the church.''' " The truth seems to be, that the prom- 
inent doctrines of Christianity are undoubtedly taught in 
these symbols, such as the depravity of man, the necessity of 
Redemption through Christ, and of pardon and justification 
solely by the grace of God. But these fundamental truths 
are expressed in a manner, which, whilst it may perhaps 
accord with individual passages of Scripture, is inconsistent 
with its general tenor, and fails to distinguish the outward 

(1) Atqui hinc sescenti quid dico sexcents, bis mille libri conscripti 
sunt de communicatione idiomatum, de unione hypostatica, &c. Ele- 
menta Theol. Dog. Vol. II. p. 93. 

(2) Vol. I, p. 146. 



268 VOCATION OF THE 

form of the Revelation from its inward kernel." And again, 
"It may as well be openly acknowledged, and affirmed for 
the benefit of the church, that there are but few divines who 
yet believe and teach the views of the symbolical books ; 
and of these some are prejudiced fanatics, and others, how- 
ever orthodox they profess to be, give their own interpretation 
to these books." l " Under these circumstances it is evident, 
that these books can no longer serve as a rule of doc- 
trine:" 2 "For not only have the rationalists abandoned 
them, the leading champions of orthodoxy have also devi- 
ated from them, such as Doederlein, Moras, Michaelis, the 
venerable Reinhard, Knapp, Storr, Schott, Schwartz, Au- 
gusti, Marheinecke, Halm, Olshausen, Tholuck and Heng- 
stenberg." 3 That our prominent divines in this country, 
within the same period have done the same, such as Drs. 
Endress, Lochman, H. A. Muhlenberg, and the great mass 
of our divines now living, and of our church during the 
last quarter of a century, we fully established in our Vin- 
dication of American Luther anism, in the Lutheran Observer 
during the past year, It was, therefore, natural that the 
Synod of Pennsylvania many years ago ceased to require a 
pledge of conformity to any of these symbols ; as we also 
proved in the vindication referred to, by the testimony of 
two highly respectable divines still spared to the church, 
and as we know personally since thirty years, when we 
were licensed by that body. Still, to be without any other 
symbol than the Bible, was manifestly a defect, and how 
did the General Synod, believing it such, and feeling her- 
self called to furnish a remedy, fulfil her vocation ? She 
did it, we reply, in a manner, evincing alike her conscious- 
ness of the progress of theological science, and the scrip- 
tural development of the church, as well as her respect for 
her ecclesiastical ancestry ; in a manner, we venture to af- 
firm, that has commanded the respect of all enlightened 
divines of other churches, and has been signally blessed of 
God for her own enlargement and improvement. She re- 
quired unqalified assent to the Bible, and an assent to the 
Augsburg Confession, as a substantially correct exhibition 
of the fundamental doctrines of the Bible. She did it by 

(1) Vol. L, p. 148. 

(2) Kollner, p. 147. 

(3) Idem, p. 121. 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 269 

establishing her Theological Seminary on the same doctrinal 
basis, not for the purpose of teaching the symbolic system 
of the sixteenth century, for her leading members had all 
relinquished some of its features ; but as her Constitution, 
adopted in 1825, just a quarter of a century ago, explicitly 
declares, to prepare men to teach, not all the doctrines or 
aspects of doctrine in the Augsburg Confession, but the 
'■'fundamental doctrines;" and not those aspects of doctrine 
which might be considered fundamental peculiarities of that 
Confession, but "the fundamental doctrines of the Scrip- 
tures;" those aspects of doc bine which Christians generally 
regard as fundamental truths of the word of God. Or, 
as the same idea is expressed in another clause of that Con- 
stitution, the design of the General Synod in establishing 
her Seminary at Gettysburg, was, "to furnish the church 
with pastors, who sincerely believe, and cordially approve 
of the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures, as -they are funda- 
mentally taught in the Augsburg Confession." 

Such is the enlightened position of the General Synod of 
our church. After ages will, we doubt not, bestow upon her 
that tribute of admiration, which leading spirits in all denom- 
inations now concede to her ; but which some of her own 
beloved and esteemed sons seem unable to appreciate. And 
here it may not be amiss to utter a few words in reply to 
some strictures on Theological Seminaries by a recent writer 
on Church- Feeling. If, as his previous mention of Pennsyl- 
vania College renders probable, he refers to the Theological 
Seminary in the same place, we reply that undoubtedly the 
symbolical books of any institution and church, should be 
taught by those connected with them ; and this we are hap- 
py to know is faithfully done in our Institution. We would 
also remind that writer of what he seems to have forgotten, 
that the symbolical books of any institution, Synod, or Gen- 
eral Synod, are those books which they have adopted, and 
avowel as their rule of faith ; and that the symbolical books 
of the General Synod and the Seminary at Gettysburg are 
the Bible, and the Augsburg Confession, as a substantially 
correct exhibition of the fundamental truths of the Bible. To 
this the professorial oath of office in the Seminary adds a 
similar fundamental assent to the two Catechisms of Luther. 
This doctrinal basis of the Seminary is secured from change 
bj legislative charter, and by provision for appeal to the Su-- 
23a 



270 VOCATION OF THE 

preme Judiciary of the State. Now, these doctrines always 
have been and still are fully and faithfully taught in this 
Institution. The Professors believe and teach the same 
doctrines now which they have taught for thirty years, and for 
the purpose of teaching which they were elected to their pres- 
ent important stations ; and we may add, the very same 
doctrines, which that writer himself has preached for twen- 
ty years and still preaches ! For them to inculcate on their 
students the obsolete views of the old Lutherans, contained 
in the former symbols of the church in some parts of Ger- 
many, such as exorcism, the real presence of the body and 
blood of Christ in the eucharist, private confession, baptismal 
regeneration, immersion in baptism,, as taught in Luther s 
Larger Catechism, &c, would be to betray the confidence 
of those who elected them to office, and to defeat the design 
of the Institution, not one dollar of whose funds was con- 
tributed by Synods or individuals professing these views. 
Nor is it correct, if our institution be intended that the views 
of individuals and not of the church are taught in it. The 
doctrines taught are substantially those presented in the 
Popular Theology, and that these are the prevailing views 
of our church in America, we clearly established in different 
articles on American Lutheranism, 1 during the last year. 
We now merely add the testimony of two respectable divines, 
then omitted. The first is the Rev. Dr. Morris, who is ex- 
tensively acquainted with the views of our church, and in his 
Introduction to Dr. Kurtz's "Why are you a Lutheran," 
affirms : "Dr. Schmucker's valuable Popular Theology has 
contributed much to remove wrong impressions from the 
minds of many intelligent readers, and the Lutheran Obser- 
ver with its extensive circulation still continues to exhibit us 
in a true light." The other is Rev. Dr. Baugher, President 
of Pennsylvania College. With the exception of several 
minor shades of doctrine, in which we are more symbolic than 
he, we could not ourselves, in so few words, give a better 
description of the views taught in the Seminary than that 
contained in his "Abstract of the Doctrines and Practice of 
the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Maryland," presented to 
his Svnod, in which the points of symbolic differences are 
disposed of in these words: "We believe the scriptures 



(1) See Lutheran Observer for 1850. 



AMERICAN. LUTHERAN CHURCH. 271 

teach, that there are but two sacraments, viz.: Baptism and the 
Lord's Supper, in each of which truths essential to salvation are 
symbolically represented. We do not believe that they exert 
any influence ex opere operato. Neither do the scriptures 
warrant the belief, that Christ is present in the Lord's Supper 
in any other than a spiritual manner." And again, ''Lu- 
ther's Larger and Smaller Catechisms, the Formula Concor- 
dise, Augsburg Confession, Apology, and Smalkald Articles, 
are called, in Germany, symbolical books of the church. 
We regard them as good and useful exhibitions of truth, but 
do not receive them as binding l on the conscience, except so 
far as they agree with the word of God." "We believe in 
the reality of revivals of religion, and regard them as a 
source of the richest blessings to the church." There seems, 
therefore, to be no ground of apprehension as to our Semi- 
nary, since the doctrines of our symbols, and the prevailing 
doctrines of our American church, are here faithfully 
taught. 

With brethren entertaining the views of scripture doctrine, 
and the symbolic position here attributed to our church, we 
delight to co-operate. It is true several respectable divines 
of our church have, within the last few years, devoted more 
attention to these symbolical books, and urged others to do 
so. To this we make no objection. We have spent proba- 
bly more time in their perusal than these brethren ; yet we 
shall be very slow to believe, that after having studied and 
preached the Bible for fifteen or twenty years, they will now 
suffer themselves to receive, under the guidance of these 
symbolical books, doctrines, which, after so long a search, 
they had failed to find in the word of God. Yet should 
they even change their views of doctrine, we can still live in 
harmony with them, if they are willing to let us continue to 
teach in peace what they themselves formerly inculcated, 
and what we have always taught, and what we were 
appointed to teach. 

In view of what has been advanced, the symbolic position 
which the General Synod has adopted, in fulfilling her voca- 
tion, may be reduced to three features, viz. : 1. She has 
declared against the extended symbolic system of the for- 

(2) The italics in this quotation are ours, to show more clearly the points 



272 LOCATION OF THE 

mer ages of our church. 2. She has avowed the necessity 
of a brief creed, to exclude fundamental errorists from her 
pale ; and, 3. She has adopted the Augsburg Confession, 
as to fundamentals, for this purpose, as well on account of 
its intrinsic excellence, as its important historical associa- 
tions. With this, we for ourselves, are fully satisfied. We 
believe this position, so signally blessed of God, to be truly 
apostolic, and well calculated to extend the borders and 
improve the doctrinal purity and spiritual character of our 
church. Yet there seems to be some few ministers even in 
the General Synod, who appear not to trust either themselves 
or others, with so much apostolic liberty, though it is much 
less than the church enjoyed for four centuries, yea, so far 
as doctrine is concerned, for a thousand years after the apos- 
tolic age ! If it is deemed advisable to gratify this yearning 
after human creeds, we would propose the adoption of the 
following system : 

1. The so-called Apostles' Creed. 

2. The JVicene Creed. 

3. The Augsburg Confession, so far as its doctrinal articles 
are concerned : with one single clause annexed, stating that 
its teachings on the following doctrines shall not be regarded 
as binding, but belief or rejection of them be left to the con- 
science of each individual, viz.: the real presence, baptismal 
regeneration, private confession and absolution, " Ceremo- 
nies of the mass," the personal and condemning guilt of 
natural depravity, prior to moral action. 

This arrangement would cover the differences existing in 
our church, and allow a rational liberty in investigating the 
scriptures on these controverted topics, whilst it would exclude 
all errors, and sufficiently distinguish us as a denomination. 
It would unite in harmony all portions of our church, except 
those, who not only implicitly adopt all the errors and obso- 
lete views of the symbolical books, but are also unwilling to 
co-operate with such as cannot conscientiously follow their 
example. Even the Scandinavian churches, recentlv estab- 
lished in our North-western States, could probably unite 
with us, as some of them, at least, whilst adhering to the 
Augsburg Confession in general, propose to reject some of 
its provisions, such as private confession and absolution, as 
also some of the usages of their fatherland, the wearing of 



AMERICAN LUTHERAN CHURCH. 273 

the gown, the burning of candles on the altar by day, and 
the churching of women. 1 " In short, they propose to re- 
store the church system to the simple, pure and evangelical po- 
sition, that it undoubtedly occupied in the times of the apostles 
and the first christians." This is exactly the truly enlight- 
ened, the exalted position of our General Synod. We 
hail with delight the co-operation of these noble Northmen, 
and of all others who labor in the same spirit, and bid them 
a hearty God speed ; assured that in that great day the 
inquiry of the Master will be, whether we have conformed 
our doctrines not to the writings of Luther, but to the tuition 
of his own inspired word. 

(1) See Mr. Langland's political and religious paper, termed The Demo- 
.crat, issued at Racine, Wisconsin. 



INDEX. 



Agreement in generic truths, 179. 
America, different religious sects in, 98. 

" Lutherans in. styled the German church. 44. 

" settlement of Lutherans in, 57. 

" first Lutheran church organized in, 57. 

" an asylum, 251. 
American Lutheran Church defined, 233, 234. 

" " " characteristics of, 237. 

" " " origin of> 244, 245. 

" " " literature and theologians of, 74-84. 

" church, transplanted from other countries, 91. 
Apostolic basis, 66, 67. 

" creed, 68. 
Army, clergy in, 24. 
Authority of the Fathers rejected, 60. 
Augsburg Confession, not wholly received by the General Synod, 227. 

" " fundamentals of. only binding, 233, 162. 

" " symbolical specifications in, 181. 

" " doctrines of, received by the Saltzburg emigrants, 

183, 184. 

" " sdopted by the Swedes on the Delaware, 185. 

« " abandoned, 187. 

" " * how received by Synods, 202, 

" •* essentially adhered to by General Synod, 203. 

" " word of God substantially set forth in, 209. 

" " not received unrestrictedly by Synod of North Caro- 

lina, 218. 

" " Henkelites' misapprehension of, 219. 

" received on different occasions, 157. 

" " an exposition of doctrines, 158, 159. 

" the only symbol received by Muhlenberg and his 

associates, 171. 
" Shober dissents from, 175. 



276 INDEX. 

Augsburg Confession, pledge to. not binding to the other symbols, 177,, 378. 

" " candidates assent to, required, 168. 

Augustinian view opposed by Melancthon's theory, 88. 
Auricular Confession rejected, 159. 
Awakened persons, how dealt With, 106. 

Baptismal regeneration, 241. 
Bible opposed to tradition, 252. 

" assent to, alone required, 189, 159. 

" the only infallible rule of faith and practice, 167, 243. 
Books referred to as subsidiary to the Bible, 50. 
Brief creed of General Synod, 271-2. 
Buonaparte's religion, 66. Catechism, 102. 

Catechumens examined by the church council, 56. 

Calvin on the eucharist, 61. 

Catechism, Westminster, 193. Summary of Christianity, 193, 194. 

Luther's, 199, 200. 
Calvinism of Luther, 85 m 

Catechetical instruction. 113, 114. Opposed, 114. 
Churches in Philadelphia destroyed, 24. 

" what they could accomplish, 235. 
Church, state of before the General Synod, 29. 

" development, 248. 

" Lutheran, leading principles of, 49. 

" government, 52-56. 

" infant membership of, 54, 55. 
Churches and ministers, number of, 58. 
Church, revivals in, 38, 93. 

" duty of, to give an exposition of her doctrines, 42. 

" English Lutheran in Pittsburg, 43, 44. 

" history of, divided into three periods, 14. 

" in America, 18. 

" colonial era of, 14. 

" duty of to adopt short creeds, 69. 

" not supplied with English preaching, 102. 

** the New Amsterdam, how styled, 183. 

" how founded, 188. 

" of what it cousists, 190. 

" Luther's definition of, 190, 

" history, importance of, 90, 91 . 

" progressive, 91, 92. 

organization, grand design of, 93. 

•' in Germany, polemic character of, 94. 

" ideal membership of, 162. m 

Church Peeling, reply to the writer on, 269, 270, 271. 
Christianity, introduced among the Germans, 46. 
Christian church, features of, 155. 
Change of elementary principles, 47. 
Christ's spiritual presence in the eucharist, 62. 
Christ's visible church, 41. 
Communicants, requirement of, 116. 



INDEX. 

Converts among the slaves, 110, 111. 

Corporeal presence in the eucharist, 179. 

Controversy between Lutheran and Calvinistic divines, 89. 

Confession of faith in the Lutheran church, 208. 

Compulsory assent to the symbols, 195. 

Communion,, preparatory exercises to, 64. 

Confession, private, relinquished, 63. 

" " approved by some of the reformers, 64. 

Congregations choose their own pastors, 49. 
Confession and absolution rejected, 239. 
Creeds required of applicants for ordination, 68. 

" approved, 169. 

" proposed for adoption, 272. 

Deist reclaimed, 110. 

Development., church, 247. 

Discord in the church, 182. 

Discipline, character of, 32. 

Doctrines of orthodox denominations, 51. 

" of Luther introduced into Sweeden and Denmark) 57, I 

" of the symbolical books rejected, 174. 

" taught in the Theological Seminarv, 229, 269. 
of General Synod, 226. 

" in common with other churches, 69, 70. 
Doctrine, systematic adjustment of, 65. m 

Duty of churches in reference to symbols and traditions, 250. 
Duty, views of, 194. 

East Pennsylvania Synod, co-operation of, 30. 
Ecclesiastical relations, right to change, 189. Obligations, 158. 
Electicism of the fathers, 118. 
Effort to establish institutions. 34. 

English churches joined by descendants of German Lutherans, 4., 
" preaching by the early Lutheran fathers, 101. 
" " church suffers for want of, 102. 

Episcopal church. Lutherans reject the offer to unite with, 104, 
Episcopacy, divine right of. 104-5. 

Errors of old Lutheranism destined soon to perish, 245-6. 
Europe, union of church and state in, 235. 
Eucharist, Melancthon's views of ; change, 241, 

" Saviour's presence in, 61. 

" Cranmer and Ridley's views of, 62. 

", reformers' \ iews rejected, 62, 63. 

" Lutherans at the present day, view of, 63. 
Europe, reign of infidelity, 66. 
Eucharist, real presence in, 215, 216. 
Exorcism, retained by Luther and Melancthon, 238, 159. 

" relinquished in Saxony. 239 ; rejected, 65. 

Excitement, religious, through Whitefield's preaching, 96. 

fathers, educational period of, 36. 
" practical piety of, 36. 
24 



277 



278 INDEX. 

Fathers to be imitated only as far as they imitate Christ, 256. 
" and symbolical books, 257. 

" approve of revivals. 98, 112, 113; labor among all classes, 110, 
" questions aslced at licensure by the, 36, 37. 
Fashionable vices exposed, 100. 
Festivals, 54, 103. 
First Lutheran Synod held, 21. 

Figurative meaning of the words, "this is my body," &c, 150. 
" expressions of the Saviour on other occasions, 151. 
" interpretation by Luther, 126; objections to, 127. 
Form of Concord, when formed, 258; published, 164; rejected, 165; bj 

the king of Denmark, 261 . 
Fundamentals of Christianity, 248. 

Germany, Lutheran church in, how effected by symbols, 264, 265, 
" Reformed church in, 262. 
" aids in establishing churches in America, 18. 
'• the fountain head of Lutheranism, 44. 
Germans, characteristics of, 45. 
" religion of, 45, 46. 
" oppressed by Romish intolerance, 16. 
" destitution of, 17. 
" settlement of, in North Carolina, 18. 
" integrity and benefit of, 27, 28. 
" sympathize with the American Church, 28, 29. 
" labor to perpetuate their language, 102. 
General Synod, doctrinal position of, 160, 161, 257. 
" " agreement in, 212. 

» era of, 29. 
" " influence of, 30. 

" " how regarded, Luther's catechism, 228. 

" " grand design of, 232. 

" " formation of, 14. 

Georgia, first settlement of Lutherans in, 17. 

Henkel and the Henkelites, 215, 217. 
Henkelites, anti-Lutheran doctrines of, 218. 

Imputation, doctrine of, rejected, 159, 173. 

" of Adam's sin, 242. 

Inexpediency of binding to the symbolical books, 182. 
Infidelity, effects of, 98. 
Influence of Wesley, 249. 
Institution, why not established, 34. 
Instruction of the young, 55. 

Kirchenagende, the, 26. 

Koinonia, different significations of, 134. 

Laity unite in the vocation of the ministers, 32. 

Lesson that may be learned from the review, 39, 40. 

Liturgies U9ed in the worship, 54; composed, 103; when used, 104. 

literary and theological institutions of the church, 58. 



INDEX. 279 

Liberality and christian union, 249. 

" of Whitefield, 18. 
Literal sense of a passage, whea to be deviated from, 123. 
Lord's Supper, design, of, 145-7, 148-9. 
Luther disregards his offical oath, 195. 

" opposed to his followers being called by his name, 196. 
" urges to the study of the Bible, 197-8, 59, 255. 
" Luther and his Spartan band, 47. 
Luther's ordination proved valid, 47-8. 

" views modified by Melancthon, 65. >' 
" predestination, 66. 
Luther regarded as standard of orthodoxy, 60. 

" opposed to tradition — adheres to the Bible, 253-4. 
Lutherans in Russia, 57. 

" in the entire world, 58. 
Lutheran fathers not inferior to the New England divines, 39. 
" name, whence derived, 43. 
" and Reformed churches united, 167, 222-3. 
" ministers, literary position of, 26, 33 ; labors, 34. 
" position of, 230.* 
" ministers in New York, 15. 
" church in Sweden, Norway and Finland, 73, 74. 
Lutherans, for want of English preaching, become Episcopal, 16. 
" first settlement of, 14; second, 15; third, 16. 

settle in Maine, 18. 
" rapid increase of, 21. 
" destitution of, 98; youth neglected, 98. 

Mass retained in the Augsburg Confession, 241. 
Meeting for catechization, 55, 56. 
Ministers, parity of, 156. 

" not bound to the minutia of creeds, 67. 

" bound only to the Bible, 184. 
Muhlenberg and liturgies, 170. 

" his manner of preaching, 57. 
arrival of, 19, 20. 

Names given to Luther, 60. 

New Testament ordination, 71. 

Nicene creed, 260. 

No pardon to the impenitent, 64. 

Normative authority of symbols, 197. 

Oath, 196. 

Obstacles to religion, 21. 

Objections to the ubiquity of Christ's body, 138. 

Old confessions, occasions of, 220. 

Ordain, passages in which occurs, 72. 

Order in worship, 105. 

Ordination, proof texts of, 71, 72. 

Ordination of ministers, 71. 

Orphan house erected by the Saltzbergers, 17. 

Passover, institution of, 143. 



280 INDEX. 

Pastoral labors, 108-9. 

Passages supposed to favor Luther's view of the Real Presence, 132-3. 
Pennsylvania legislature endows a college for the Germans, 27. 
Piety, decline of, 25. 

Popular Theology, opinion of Drs. Kurtz and Morris, 231, 270. 
Preaching, manner of, 99, 100, 101. 
" in different languages, 33. 
" of Spener and Pranke — revival, 94, 95. 
Prayer meetings encouraged. 37, 38 ; established. 106. 

" " at Philadelphia and Lancaster, 108. 

" Lutheran fathers, men of, 107. 

Real presence held by the Reformers, 201. 

" " views held by Lutherans of the present day, 20] 
'•' " rejected by all Protestants, 13*2. 
" " and baptismal regeneration, 210, 211. 
Reformers appear, 4G-7. 

" men of extensive learning, 59. 
Retrospect rich in blessings, 38-9. 

" preliminary remarks on, 11-13. 
Responsibility, individual, 192. 

Religious and ecclesiastical obligation not hereditary, 159. 
Revivals, Dr. Kunz, 113. 
Romish sacrament, validity, 49. 

" church, corruptions canhonized, 48. 
" doctrine of transubstantiation, 125. 

Saviour's passion, 180. 

Saltzburgers, Balzius and Gornau, settle among, 17. 
School, plan for English and German, 27. 
Scripture, how interpreted, 122. 

" language, 121. 

to be searched, 191, 192. 
Smalkald Articles, rejected, 165-6. 
Special conferences, 117-18. 
Sufferings of Christ, 86-87. 
Symbolical book never made a test of discipline, 188. 

" " how regarded by Synods, 185-6. 

Symbolic rigor relaxed, 157. 
Synod, constitutions of, 213. 
Symbols, extensive occasions of discord, 265-6. 

Tennessee Conference, position of, 216, 217. 

" " opinion of the General Synod, 226, 227. 

Temperance advocated by Muhlenberg, 111. 
Theological institutions established, 30. 

Views of Luther and Calvin, how regarded by their followers, 14? - 
Vocation, 247. 

Words, how derive their meaning, 121. 

Young, education of, 113. 






ir 









Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



